Ukraine
Stephen Doughty Excerpts(1 day, 6 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the situation in Ukraine.
Next month marks four years since Russia launched its illegal and barbarous full-scale invasion of Ukraine, but Ukraine has stood strong. We have stood alongside Ukraine and will continue to do so. I am particularly proud that this week also marks one year on from our agreement of a crucial 100-year partnership with Ukraine—I know that it enjoys wide support across the House—which we will celebrate and take further forward this week.
This has been four years in which the Ukrainian people have stood firm, bravely resisting the assault on their sovereign territory, and four years of enduring relentless drone and missile strikes that have killed civilians and torn through homes, infrastructure, hospitals and schools. Like many hon. Members across the House, I have been in Kyiv while such attacks have been under way. I have seen the devastation and damage caused and the implications for the civilians—the ordinary people of Ukraine—who face that. I have been in the bunkers where children have to take their lessons because of the attacks, and I have heard the harrowing stories of those who have been abducted and taken by barbarous and illegal Russian action.
Just last week, Russia launched 252 drones and 36 missiles at targets across Ukraine in yet another attack that killed and injured dozens of civilians and left millions without power or heating as temperatures plunged to minus 20°. The attack also included an Oreshnik intermediate-range ballistic missile that struck critical infrastructure near the Polish border. Russia’s use, for the second time, of a hypersonic IRBM in Ukraine—this time close to NATO territory—is a reckless and dangerous escalation. Moscow claimed that it was responding to an alleged Ukrainian attack on one of Putin’s residences, which is a baseless allegation and yet another example of Russia using disinformation to justify its actions. Just last week I discussed disinformation with hon. Members at the Foreign Affairs Committee. I know that it is an issue that many of us across the House take deeply seriously.
As an aside, I note the absence in the Chamber yet again of one party—we all note that, as there is a strong cross-party consensus on Ukraine. Of course, that party has willingly repeated Russian narratives on NATO and Ukraine, and indeed its former leader in Wales took bribes from Russia to share those narratives. Reform Members might like this to go away, but it is not just their words that speak volumes; their absence does, too.
I genuinely commend the Opposition and the other parties present, because I have had many conversations with the Members here, and I think all of us, whichever side of the House we are on, have stood resolutely with Ukraine since the start of this conflict. That very much represents where the British people stand on this illegal and barbarous aggression on our continent. We know from our own history what such aggression can mean, and we will continue to take that stand. I am proud of those in my constituency and all our constituencies who continue to support Ukrainians in the UK, and continue to stand with Ukraine in its fight against Russia.
Russia’s barbaric actions come against the backdrop of US-led peace negotiations. Time and again, Ukraine has shown that it is the party of peace, and just last week, President Zelensky came together with world leaders and the United States in Paris to discuss next steps. We welcome the significant progress that has been made, and the work of President Trump and many others to take that forward. Alongside France, the UK has led the coalition of the willing, carrying out detailed military planning on the security guarantees that are needed to insure against future Russian aggression in the event of a peace settlement.
In Paris, at the largest meeting yet of the coalition, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister joined President Macron and President Zelensky to sign a declaration of intent. That declaration confirms that in the event of a peace deal, the UK and France would deploy forces to Ukraine. It paves the way for a legal framework under which British, French and partner forces could operate on Ukrainian soil, securing its skies and seas and regenerating its armed forces for the future. As the Prime Minister has said, if British troops were to deploy under this agreement, the matter would come before this House for a debate and a vote. The Paris declaration agreed between us and our coalition partners sets out the security guarantees that are to be activated once a ceasefire takes effect.
Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)
I have previously suggested that to have an occupied eastern part of Ukraine under Russian control while the western part of unoccupied Ukraine was left as a military vacuum would be a recipe for disaster. However, it is of concern that the alliance that stood firm at the end of world war two to ensure that West Germany did not get encroached upon by Soviet forces from the east is not still in being, as far as Ukraine is concerned, because of the ambiguous attitude of President Trump. Does the Minister have a view on why President Trump is so clear when it comes to dictatorship in and aggression by Iran, yet has such a strangely different view when it comes to the same two features of Russian behaviour?
Stephen Doughty
I have huge respect for the right hon. Gentleman, as he knows, but I would gently disagree with his suggestion. On President Trump’s leadership, in the important discussions that took place in Paris with the United States and other coalition partners, it was set out clearly how security guarantees would be activated. More broadly, I am proud that we continue to stand with the United States in NATO, and proud of our commitment to article 5 and to defending the security of the alliance. That is absolutely crucial to our security, and the security of all of us in the alliance.
We of course support all the progress towards a just and lasting peace, but it is crucial that we keep Ukraine in the fight. We all know that its armed forces are fighting heroically and with great determination. Like many Members, I have met those who have served on the frontlines in Ukraine, and seen the extraordinary bravery and fortitude that they show, but we must recognise that they are under immense pressure, so we need to get them the support that they need to defend themselves, and to ensure that they have support in the future.
Stuart Anderson (South Shropshire) (Con)
Today the NATO Parliamentary Assembly has been given an open letter from the Chairman of the Ukrainian Parliament, Ruslan Stefanchuk. He has been here, and I have met him a few times. He is urging
“the immediate delivery of air defence and air-to-air missiles”.
Ukraine is in desperate need of them, and he has asked all NATO members to speed up this delivery as much as possible.
Stephen Doughty
I thank the hon. and gallant Gentleman for his comments, and for sharing what the Speaker of the Rada has said. I too have met him. He is a remarkable individual, as indeed are all the Ukrainian MPs we have all met. They stood up to defend their Parliament at the most difficult of times: at the time of the invasion. He raises important points. These are all matters that the Secretary of State for Defence, the Minister for the Armed Forces and others are looking at.
We are very much looking at all the immediate needs, and of course, we stand ready to support Ukraine wherever we can. Indeed, that is why we have led the 50-nation Ukraine defence contact group, alongside Germany. We secured £50 billion in military aid pledges last year, and we are going further. In Project Octopus, we have developed an advanced air defence interceptor drone, which is to be mass-produced in the UK. We are developing a new long-range ballistic missile to boost Ukraine’s firepower and defend against Putin’s war machine.
We continue to lead, not only on supporting Ukraine, but on galvanising partners to maintain support. I met my good colleague from Portugal this morning, and discussed the contribution that Portugal has made. Indeed, many countries across Europe, large and small, have stepped up, and it is important to acknowledge that European partners increased aid by more than 50% in 2025, compared to the year before. In December, as colleagues will know, the European Council agreed a €90 billion loan to help meet Ukraine’s needs, and of course we are also providing up to £4.1 billion in support through a World Bank loan guarantee that runs until 2027.
Of course, as well as the military support that we need to provide to Ukraine, now and into the future, so that it can defend against and deter future threats in the event of a settlement, we must rachet up the pressure on Putin to de-escalate the war, engage in meaningful negotiations and come to the table. I am proud that this Government have sanctioned over 900 individuals, entities and ships under the UK’s Russia sanctions regime, including Russia’s largest oil companies and 520 oil tankers. Last week, as colleagues will know, the UK supported the United States in intercepting the sanctioned vessel Bella 1 in the north Atlantic as it made its way to Russia.
We are working with international partners on further measures to tackle the shadow fleet. Those include additional sanctions, steps to discourage third countries from engaging with the fleet, increased information sharing, and readiness to use regulatory and interdiction powers. By choking off Russia’s oil revenues and squeezing its war economy, we are showing Putin that he cannot outlast us.
Our sanctions are biting hard. There is clear evidence of their impact: Russia’s oil export revenues are at a four-year low. We are preparing to implement further significant sanctions this year, which have been announced, including bans on importing refined oil of Russian origin, and a maritime service ban on Russian liquefied natural gas, which a number of Members have rightly called for over past months.
As a result of our actions and those of our partners, Russia’s economy is now in its worst position since the full-scale invasion began. We are also taking the crucial steps to stop the third-country circumvention of sanctions. Whether it is intercepting crypto networks that are flooding resource into Russia, the components and other things on critical lists that it might be using in drones, or the energy revenues that it is generating, we will not cease till we find every way in which Putin is attempting to circumvent our regimes. I am proud to work closely with colleagues in Departments across Government on this, but also, crucially, with European, United States and other partners. That is having a tangible impact, and is as crucial as the direct support that we provide.
Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)
I agree that the foreign exchange earnings of the Russian economy have been badly damaged by the sanctions, but we are also coming to the conclusion, are we not, that it is legal for Western powers to intervene on the fake flag fleet—the shadow fleet—as we saw last week? What plans do the Government and our allies have to make the whole business of exporting Russian oil and gas far more risky, by undertaking a large-scale interception of the shadow fleet?
Stephen Doughty
The hon. Member will note that I chose my words about future actions carefully. I will obviously not go into specifics, but let me just say that we know what Putin is doing. We know where he is taking things and what is happening, and we will not hesitate to act where we can, lawfully, to choke off those revenues that go towards fuelling the war against Ukraine. Let us remember that that is exactly what they do. Let this be a warning: we will not hesitate to use the powers we have—lawfully, of course—wherever we can.
Stuart Anderson
I thank the Minister for giving way a second time. In December, I went on a cross-party trip with NATO to South Korea; we heard that its Government have changed their position on Russia and are now looking to open plants in Russia. They spouted the Russian lines against NATO. I have fed that into Government, but we have recently signed a huge trade deal with South Korea. Is it a concern in Government that people we are trading with are now shifting their position on Russia?
Stephen Doughty
We continue to work and engage with all partners around the world about the reality of any loopholes or routes that could be supporting the war. As we all know, troops from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea were brought in by Russia to fight. There are also often entities and individuals operating within countries, and we try to bring those to the attention of the authorities of our partners and friends, so that they can take action, but we will not hesitate to sanction and take action, where appropriate.
Turning to the crucial issue of accountability, we are working closely with Ukraine and its allies to hold Russia accountable for its heinous crimes in Ukraine. We are a founding member and chair of the conference of participants of the register of damage, which allows Ukranians to record losses, injury or damage caused by the war. In December, I was proud to visit The Hague to sign, on behalf of the UK, the convention to establish an international claims commission, which will assess claims under the register of damage to determine future compensation. We are also supporting the office of the prosecutor general of Ukraine and the International Criminal Court to ensure that allegations of war crimes are fully and fairly investigated, using independent and robust legal mechanisms.
As I mentioned, tens of thousands of boys and girls have been snatched from their families, deported and indoctrinated by Russia. We are clear that this is a campaign to erase a nation’s future. We cannot allow that to happen, so we are backing crucial efforts to identify those children and bring them home, and we are working with partners on that. We have committed more than £2.8 million to helping to trace and return them. We welcome all that colleagues have been doing to raise awareness of the issue globally.
Tahir Ali (Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley) (Lab)
Last year, I moved my constituency office into Bosnia House, a former police station that was taken over by Anes Ceric, the CEO of the Bosnia UK Network, and his organisation. The network supports all communities, including Ukrainians, Syrians and Bosnians. There are such facilities not only in my constituency, but across the country. More help needs to be provided to ensure that the Ukrainians who settle in this country are fully supported, not only to achieve a better life, but to integrate with other communities. If any support—for example, any money drawn from sanctions—can be targeted at those organisations, it would be most gratefully received.
Stephen Doughty
My hon. Friend is right to point out the contribution of the many organisations across the country that have reached out to support Ukrainian communities. I have certainly seen that in Cardiff, where some fantastic groups have done that; I know that is reflected in my hon. Friend’s constituency. There is a strong heritage in this country of individuals who fled conflict working to support others who have done the same. I have seen that repeatedly in many different groups. I pay tribute to all of them, and to all the people up and down Britain who have brought Ukrainians into their homes and supported these efforts in many other ways.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
While we are on the subject of Russian war crimes, James Scott Rhys Anderson is one of the only Britons to have been captured by the Russians. He was tried—the Foreign Office believes on false charges—and charged with being part of a terrorist group and illegally entering Russia. He was sentenced to five years in a Russian prison, and will then be transferred to a Russian penal colony, rather than being treated in accordance with the Geneva convention. What progress has been made on securing his release?
Stephen Doughty
I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we are well aware of the number of cases. Russia has obligations under the Geneva convention, and we expect them to be upheld. We regularly raise these cases at the appropriate levels. I am happy to talk to him separately about that specific case, but he can be assured that I am well aware of that and a number of other cases. We are clear that international law must be upheld, including the basic principles of treatment of prisoners of war and situations involving children. That goes to the heart of the nature of what the Russian regime has been doing and the lengths it is willing to go to. We urge the upholding of the commitments to basic decency and the treatment of individuals, to which we are all signed up.
We are standing with Ukrainian people on the ground in their hour of need. We have provided more than £577 million in humanitarian support for vulnerable citizens since the invasion began, including those forced to flee their homes. This year we will spend up to £100 million on support, including to help families through this harsh winter. We have upped our support in energy, particularly in response to regular attacks on energy infrastructure. A lot of our work is to help to mitigate that, but the scale of those attacks is severe and they have a daily impact, as Members can see in media reporting and from what we know on the ground.
There is no firmer friend for Ukraine than the UK. Indeed, our commitment runs deep. I have mentioned the crucial 100-year partnership that the Prime Minister signed with President Zelensky in Kyiv. That agreement has enhanced co-operation across defence and security, science, trade and culture.
Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for his update, particularly the in-depth overview that he is giving us. Further to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley (Tahir Ali), I would appreciate an update on the work that the Minister is doing to support families in this country. I commend to him the work of the Ukrainian community centre in Reading, where there is a Ukrainian language library. It is one of the very few in the south of England, and people visit from west London and Oxford to use it. It is important that families are able to maintain their native language and that children can retain their culture at this difficult time. Will he say a few words about the importance of that form of domestic support?
Stephen Doughty
My hon. Friend makes a hugely important point. Indeed, there is a similar initiative—a Ukrainian language library—in my constituency. It is absolutely crucial that that support is given, not only because it is the right thing to do for those young people, enabling them to maintain a connection to their culture, heritage and language, but because it stands in stark contrast to the attempts by Putin to wipe out their language, culture, history and heritage—not least through the abduction of children and continued attacks. One of the most moving moments during my visit to Kyiv was in a bunker under a school, where I saw the remarkable fortitude and resilience of young people and their teachers in the face of Russia’s attempts to destroy their lives physically and psychologically. They stand firm and resilient, as Ukrainians do. That should be a lesson to us all.
Under the 100-year partnership, as well as the joint development of drone technology, trading links, digital connection and other matters, we also have important school-twinning programmes. Those things will, collectively, deliver long-term economic growth and security for the UK and Ukraine, and strengthen ties between our nations.
I will end my remarks as I know that many Members wish to contribute. The UK’s support for Ukraine is iron-clad. The Ukrainians’ security is our security. We fully support US-led efforts to secure a just and lasting peace. As we have said repeatedly, only the Ukrainian people can decide their future. We remain committed to the principle that international borders must never be changed by force, and any deal must guarantee Ukraine’s sovereignty and security—and, indeed, Europe and the United Kingdom’s security—in the future. In the meantime, we will not hesitate to keep supporting Ukraine and ensure that it has the military equipment to defend itself, while sustaining the economic pressure on Putin to cut off the revenues funding this barbaric war, and ensuring accountability for the appalling scenes of destructions and devastation, be they against children, infrastructure or the whole nation of Ukraine. Slava Ukraini.
UK-Overseas Territories Joint Ministerial Council 2025
Stephen Doughty Excerpts(2 days, 6 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)
The 13th UK-overseas territories joint ministerial council was held from 24 to 27 November 2025 in London. The council was attended by elected leaders and representatives from Anguilla, Ascension, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, the Falkland Islands, Gibraltar, Montserrat, the Pitcairn Islands, St Helena, the sovereign base areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia, Tristan da Cunha and the Turks and Caicos Islands.
The overseas territories make invaluable contributions to our British family. The UK has a responsibility to defend the OTs, to ensure security and good governance of the overseas territories and their peoples.
The JMC is the highest forum for political dialogue and consultation among the elected leaders and representatives of the overseas territories and UK Ministers. We met under the strapline of “Protect, Grow, Sustain—Together”. This reflects the UK’s desire to build closer relationships, based on mutual respect and inclusion, and to transform the UK’s relationship with the overseas territories for us to deliver greater security, prosperity and sustainability.
In my capacity as Minister for the overseas territories, I chaired the council. During the council, the Foreign Secretary met elected leaders to discuss UK and overseas territories’ priorities. Other UK ministerial colleagues who participated in the discussions included: the right hon. Lord Hanson of Flint, Minister of State at the Home Office; the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry East (Mary Creagh); the Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds North West (Katie White); my hon. and learned Friend the Economic Secretary to the Treasury; Lord Coaker, Minister of State at the Ministry of Defence; and the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, my hon. Friend the Member for Rother Valley (Jake Richards). The UK Special Representative for Nature Ruth Davis OBE, the UK Commonwealth envoy, and representatives from UK Export Finance, the National Cyber Security Centre, the Alan Turing Institute, Health Innovation Kent, Surrey, and Sussex, the Glasgow 2026 Organising Company, AtkinsRéalis and British Expertise International also participated in discussions.
We were deeply honoured by His Majesty the King hosting a reception at Buckingham Palace for those attending the joint ministerial council. The Commons Speaker hosted a dinner for elected leaders and representatives in Parliament.
The UK Government and the elected leaders and representatives of the overseas territories reaffirmed our support for the five principles I set out last year to guide the UK’s relationship with the elected Governments of the overseas territories: devolution and democratic autonomy for the overseas territories; listening to the overseas territories, following the principle of “nothing about you without you”; partnership with the overseas territories based on mutual respect and inclusion—rights come with responsibilities; good governance and ensuring proper democratic accountability and regulation; and defending the overseas territories’ security, autonomy and rights, including the right of self-determination.
The council agreed priorities and set out commitments and areas for joint work in the year ahead. The elected leaders and representatives of the overseas territories and I agreed to develop partnership compacts between the UK and any territory that wishes to join. Partnership compacts are intended to provide tailored, practical frameworks for advancing shared priorities, and to signal a renewed commitment to partnership. At the council we agreed the basis upon which to develop the partnership compacts in a collaborative manner. We agreed that the 2012 overseas territories White Paper remained the component foundation of our partnership as complemented by recent statements and agreements. I confirmed our intention to develop a UK Government charter to strengthen commitments from our side on how the UK Government engage with the overseas territories.
The key themes of discussion at this year’s council were: continuing the reset of the relationship between the UK and the overseas territories; security and irregular migration; economic growth and diversification; tackling illicit finance; AI and innovation in healthcare; cyber-security; nature, climate and the environment; official development assistance; and sport and the Glasgow 2026 Commonwealth games. We also discussed a range of other issues. The discussions were open and forward-looking, demonstrating a mutual commitment to strengthening the partnership.
We discussed the crucial work of overseas territories in managing unique and globally significant environments and ecosystems, as stewards of 94% of Britain's unique biodiversity, and we reflected on the outcomes of COP30. With the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry East (Mary Creagh) and Dr Gemma Harper OBE, Chief Executive of the Joint Nature Conservation Committee, we launched the UK overseas territories biodiversity strategy—the UK and the overseas territories united for nature.
We reviewed the complex security and irregular migration threats facing the overseas territories. The UK is committed to collaborating proactively with all territories to fulfil our duty to defend the people of the overseas territories and strengthen security and justice across the UK family. Together with the elected leaders and representatives of the overseas territories, we emphasised that these serious challenges, including from serious and organised crime, require sustainable solutions through comprehensive, multi-agency approaches—including co-ordination, defence, operational support, reform across security and criminal justice sectors, regional co-operation and targeted action addressing underlying social issues.
According to Office for National Statistics data, the UK’s trading relationship with its overseas territories would place them collectively among the UK’s top 25 trading partners. We are committed to strengthening this partnership and supporting practical steps to unlock further growth. The JMC included sessions with UK Export Finance and a business engagement and networking event with UK companies delivered in partnership with British Expertise International. We will continue to build on such initiatives to help deliver mutual prosperity for peoples in the UK and overseas territories.
The UK and overseas territories reaffirmed our joint commitment to tackling illicit finance, by upholding and continuing to strive for the highest international financial standards. I noted the importance of the overseas territories delivering on previous commitments, including at the last joint ministerial council, to expand access to their registers of beneficial ownership. We welcomed the launch of St Helena’s publicly accessible register of beneficial ownership, and the commitment by the Falkland Islands to implement their register next summer. We welcome the launch of legitimate interest access registers of beneficial ownership in the Cayman Islands—and their commitment to make further improvements to user access—and the Turks and Caicos Islands. The UK underlined the urgency of delivering progress in that constructive endeavour with territories that have yet to satisfy our expectations on access and transparency on these issues. We agreed to hold further technical discussions and I will chair a discussion with elected leaders at a ministerial illicit finance dialogue in the first quarter of 2026. The UK reiterated its ultimate expectation of fully public registers of beneficial ownership in the overseas territories, and we will continue to pursue that objective in future discussions.
We welcomed the work of overseas territories in sanctions implementation and enforcement and reiterated our offer to work with overseas territories to enhance this area of work. A range of other detailed discussions were also held bilaterally on specific issues affecting the overseas territories related to constitutions, public services, infrastructure and relations with neighbours and the UK.
We agreed a joint communiqué, which was issued following the conclusion of the council and published on the gov.uk website.
[HC1237]
Nigeria: Freedom of Religion or Belief
Stephen Doughty Excerpts(2 days, 6 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)
I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) for securing the debate and for his tireless work as special envoy. I thank hon. Members from across the House for their thoughtful contributions. I will try to respond to as many of the points that have been raised as I can in the time available.
I declare an interest as a Christian who has worked with Open Doors and others in the past to draw attention to cases where people are persecuted for their beliefs. I genuinely welcome the chance to keep this important matter in the spotlight. I have engaged with the issue for many years, including when I was shadow Minister for Africa. I was glad to hear my hon. Friend mention Nigerian communities in the UK. I have had the pleasure of meeting Nigerian Christian communities in my constituency of Cardiff South and Penarth, and I know the amazing contribution that they make, alongside Nigerian communities across the UK.
My hon. Friend is right that this issue should interest, concern and deeply shock us all because of the horrific things that we have seen. The brutality of the attacks against religious communities in Nigeria is truly appalling. The cold-blooded massacre of over 200 Christians in Yelwata, Benue state, last October was particularly shocking. We have heard many terrible statistics today, but last year’s Open Doors world watch list reported that armed groups murdered 3,100 Christians for their faith in Nigeria in 2025, and abducted a further 3,000. It is shocking to hear that extremists have stormed villages, killed worshippers, kidnapped families and burned homes, and we have heard some truly horrific examples today.
Nigeria’s constitution promises freedom of religion or belief for all. Every person in that country deserves the right to practise their faith or belief safely, without fear or persecution. When we defend freedom of religion or belief, we help to build trust between communities, strengthen Nigeria’s social fabric and create conditions for lasting peace and prosperity for everyone. That is why Nigeria is one of the 10 countries prioritised for targeted action in the Government’s strategy on freedom of religion or belief, launched last July.
We welcome the President’s commitment to religious freedoms and his pledge to safeguard freedom of belief for all Nigerians. I am glad that my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland recognised that we are working closely with the Nigerian authorities, along with communities and faith leaders directly, to uphold and protect these freedoms. Indeed, my colleague Baroness Chapman, the Minister for Africa, continues to be engaged closely in this topic, and she is extremely concerned about the violence against many communities, including religious communities, in Nigeria.
My hon. Friend asked about the work that we are doing to raise these issues at the highest levels. Baroness Chapman spoke directly with Nigeria’s Foreign Minister Tuggar about freedom of religion or belief in November. Our high commissioner and his team engage with local authorities, communities and faith leaders in affected areas, including with groups such as the Governors’ Forum, the National Peace Committee and the National Human Rights Commission.
We know that criminality, intercommunal violence and insecurity make things worse for religious communities. That is why we focus on tackling the root causes of instability to protect people’s rights, whether they come from Christian communities or Muslim communities, or whether they are humanists, have different beliefs or, indeed, have no beliefs. We need to create a society where everybody is able to live and to practise in the way that they wish. I am glad that my hon. Friend mentioned the case of Mubarak Bala, which I remember raising on many occasions in the past. We highlight violations of freedom of religion or belief on the international stage and push for joint action, including at the UN, the G7, as part of the Article 18 Alliance and in bodies like the Human Rights Council.
My hon. Friend and other hon. Members rightly pointed to the violent extremist groups, such as Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa, which continue to attack people in shocking ways in the north-east of Nigeria. They target anyone who rejects their ideology. My hon. Friend made the important point that it is not just Christians, but the mainly Muslim population of the north-east who suffer terribly as a result. However, the Christian minority faces extreme persecution through mass kidnappings and murders. Those are utterly unacceptable and have shocked the world.
Intercommunal violence and criminal banditry are linked, and they fuel deaths and tensions. Criminals smuggle weapons into Nigeria, affecting both Muslims and Christians, and they use motorbikes and all sorts of other techniques to evade the authorities. Conflict over land and resources in Nigeria often takes on a religious aspect as tensions rise and violence escalates. Those ideologies can sometimes be used as psychological warfare, with attacks on churches and mosques being seen as acts of revenge.
However, peaceful dialogue can resolve disputes before they escalate. Since our last debate on this issue in 2024, we have rolled out the UK’s Strengthening Peace and Resilience in Nigeria programme across Kaduna, Katsina, Benue and Plateau states; I was glad to hear that referred to. The programme is doing very important work in reducing violence by strengthening local peace and justice systems and supporting practical, community-led solutions. One early success is that 5,000 internally displaced people have returned and resettled after a peace agreement between the Bassa and Egbura communities in Nasarawa state. If we do not tackle the root causes of insecurity, religious communities will remain at risk of these terrible atrocities.
My hon. Friend mentioned our co-operation with Nigeria more broadly on security issues, which I am very pleased to play a role in alongside my colleague, the Minister for Africa. Last July, we hosted the third security and defence partnership dialogue with Nigeria.
Stephen Doughty
I will be generous and give way to the hon. Gentleman in his new position.
Mike Wood
The tragic case of Deborah Samuel Yakubu is a reminder of the culture of impunity that has been allowed to develop in too many parts of Nigeria. Can the Minister assure the House that the UK Government do everything and take every opportunity to stress the need for improved security in particularly vulnerable parts of Nigeria to ensure that people are safe to exercise their religious beliefs?
Stephen Doughty
I absolutely can. I mentioned a range of different levels at which we do that—indeed, the Minister for Africa has raised a number of these issues at the highest level—and we continue to engage. The high commissioner and the team do an excellent job of engaging at all levels to raise these cases. That is why we have this dialogue, the SPRiNG programme and the investment that we are making across a range of areas with the Nigerian authorities, who are close partners in many respects and on many issues not just in Nigeria, but more broadly.
We agreed to strengthen our co-operation and provide practical support to defend against these threats. That includes very practical steps such as sharing operational lessons to counter new tactics being used by terrorists, including the use of drones and improvised explosive devices, which have tragically been used against civilians in too many locations.
The UK is trying to address the wider issues of poverty and humanitarian concerns. We support hundreds of thousands of people through our humanitarian assistance and resilience programme. I assure you, Madam Deputy Speaker, as well as the special envoy that we will keep working with the Nigerian authorities and faith leaders to address the shocking violence against people who are simply trying to follow their faith or belief.
I particularly welcome the concerns raised about Christian communities, but this issue affects many. We will work at every level to ensure that this violence is brought to an end, and we will also work globally on these issues. I really praise the special envoy for the work that he does on these important issues.
Question put and agreed to.
Human Rights Abuses: Magnitsky Sanctions
Stephen Doughty Excerpts(1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)
Let me start by thanking the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) for securing this debate. He always speaks with conviction and passion; he has been absolutely consistent on these issues for a very long time, and I recognise his leadership as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on Magnitsky sanctions and reparation. We fully support him and every colleague in this House who stands up for our values and has been sanctioned as a result—including your colleague the hon. Member for Sussex Weald (Ms Ghani), Madam Deputy Speaker.
I am grateful for all the contributions today, which have been constructively critical. I assure the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green and all Members that our teams will take the individual cases raised seriously, and I will try my best in the time available to respond to all the key points.
I emphasise from the start that I share the ambition of Members across this House. I take on board the challenge—indeed, I made many similar points in opposition on these issues in similar debates. I emphasise to colleagues the extraordinary work of the officials at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and of other teams across Government who work on these issues. I have to be honest: resource is finite, but we have invested substantially and we will continue to do so. We have set ambitious targets, including on enforcement, which I will come to, but I pay tribute to those people and recognise that they have been awarded for that work within the Department, and rightly so. That work is having a genuine impact, because sanctions are one of the most powerful tools we have to protect our security and advance our foreign policy, including in the areas described today.
We impose sanctions to isolate those responsible, to restrict their ability to act and to change their behaviour, as well as to send deterrent and other messages beyond those we target. However, sanctions must be focused, enforceable, legally sound and backed by the right resources and credible evidence. We maintain the integrity of our regime through the strictest interpretation and the solidity of the evidence underpinning sanctions. I want colleagues to understand that, because it is important for the functioning of the regime as a whole.
Since this Government came in, we have set ambitious targets on sanctions, and we have introduced more than 1,000 new sanctions designations against individuals, entities and ships. We have laid 15 new statutory instruments before Parliament, including to create a new regime on irregular migration, to which the shadow Minister referred. We have already designated 32 individuals and entities under that. We have played a leading role in the snapback of sanctions on Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programmes. Those are just some of the examples showing that sanctions are not just symbolic gestures, but practical tools that are tightly focused and have a meaningful impact.
The UK covers Magnitsky-style sanctions under two regimes: the global human rights regime and the global anti-corruption regime. Under this Government, we have delivered more than 60 designations under those regimes. In 2025, we sanctioned 29 individuals and entities under the global human rights regime, going after scam centres in Cambodia and targets in Sri Lanka, Georgia and the west bank. Many colleagues have raised those areas and issues.
We have also delivered 164 sanctions taking action on human rights violations, war atrocities and gender-based violence. We have imposed sanctions on individuals, entities and organisations responsible for supporting or inciting violence against Palestinian communities in the west bank. In June 2025, we sanctioned the Israeli Government Ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich in their personal capacities, in response to their repeated incitement of violence against Palestinian communities. I mentioned the Cambodian scam centre package, which froze 20 UK properties worth more than £125 million, directly disrupting criminal activity in the heart of London. That activity impacted on British citizens on our streets, but was also linked to global corruption networks.
In November 2024, under the global anti-corruption regime, we sanctioned three notorious kleptocrats who had siphoned wealth from their countries, along with their enablers, including family and financial fixers. We froze more than £150 million in UK assets and sent a strong signal of support to Angola and other countries. We targeted an illicit gold network centred on a Kenyan-British smuggler who was using corruption to move gold out of southern Africa. In April 2025, we sanctioned corrupt officials and judges in Georgia and Guatemala and a pro-Russian network in Moldova, exposing their activities and supporting democracy and the rule of law.
Magnitsky sanctions are not our only tool. We also have the wider geographic regimes. Just in December, we sanctioned nine individuals and entities under the Syria regulations for abuses committed under the Assad regime and during last year’s coastal violence. We have to ensure that sanctions are robust, legally sound and evidence-based and that they stand up to the most robust scrutiny, and I am sure that colleagues understand why.
Russia has been highlighted by many Members today. We have taken concerted action on that front, and it is making a significant difference. Last year, we sanctioned more than 700 individuals, entities and ships under the Russian regime. We were the first G7 country to sanction all four Russian oil majors. The US followed suit, and that has had a direct impact: Russia’s oil revenues have dropped to their lowest level since the invasion began. I know that there is strong support across at least the majority of the House on those issues, and I have listed off the many other Magnitsky sanctions designation packages.
I am conscious of the time, and I will try to respond to some of the points that have been raised. It is worth making the point that often there are similarities between the different regimes. We co-ordinate very closely with partners, particularly the European Union, the United States, Canada and others. We try to bring the weight of the world to bear on these issues at crucial times, but I emphasise to colleagues that the legal bases for our sanctions regimes are different. There are different legal and judicial processes, and that is why there are often differences. Because of where nexuses of individuals and entities are, there are also often differences in where our sanctions can have the biggest impact. Sometimes that is what underpins what otherwise appears to be incongruity between regimes, but we always try to bring them together.
The right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green specifically mentioned the Cambodian scam centres and Chen Zhi. I emphasise that Cambodia arrested Chen Zhi and extradited him to China this week, and that the National Bank of Cambodia liquidated Prince Bank on 8 January, so there has been a significant impact as a result of that package. Obviously, the sanctions are only one part of the response to these networks; there are other measures that countries can choose to take in response to very serious allegations.
A lot of questions have rightly been raised about Sudan and the work that the Government are doing on that issue. The Foreign Secretary, the Minister for Africa and I place a great deal of importance on that, and building a consensus on ending that horrific war is a core part of the Government’s diplomatic efforts, including with other regional partners and the UAE. The Foreign Secretary is in regular contact with the Emirati Foreign Minister, and the Prime Minister has also spoken to his counterpart. We will continue to use all necessary means to bring an end to the war in Sudan, which is having a devastating impact on its citizens.
A number of colleagues have asked questions about Hong Kong. Of course, we call on Beijing to repeal Hong Kong’s national security law. We are closely monitoring the situation there, and we keep sanctions under close review. I am not going to speculate on future designations, for obvious reasons, but particular cases have been raised. The case of Jimmy Lai remains an utmost priority. Diplomats continue to press for consular access, and they attended his trial. The Prime Minister has raised Mr Lai’s case directly with President Xi, and we are in close contact with his family and representatives. Of course, we want to make sure that he receives proper treatment, and we are deeply concerned about some of the allegations made about his treatment in prison.
On the case of Ryan Cornelius, I want to acknowledge that his family have been in Parliament today. We continue to support them and, indeed, the family of Charles Ridley as well. The former Foreign Secretary raised their cases with the UAE Foreign Minister last year, and I understand that he and the Minister for the Middle East, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), met the families in September. We support their clemency applications, and of course we raise those and other cases with appropriate authorities at the right time.
Jagtar Singh Johal’s case has also been mentioned. We continue to raise serious concerns about that with the Government of India at every possible opportunity.
We have not stopped our Myanmar sanctions. Since the coup, we have sanctioned 25 individuals and 39 entities.
Very important concerns have been raised about Roman Abramovich and Chelsea football club’s assets. I draw colleagues’ attention to what we have said on that, and to the Prime Minister’s action on the licence.
Colleagues have also expressed strong concerns about the shadow Attorney General. As the Prime Minister set out yesterday, the Conservatives have some very serious questions to answer on this issue, which is completely unfathomable to me and deeply disappointing.
On the question of enforcement—
Stephen Doughty
The hon. Gentleman mentions the importance of reporting to Parliament, and I can assure him that I have been scrutinised in this place many times. I have sent a letter to the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, and to Lord Ricketts in the other place, to set out the full detail of all the work we have done. I am committed to reporting regularly to Parliament on these issues; indeed, I have held private meetings with many Members from across the House to discuss their concerns, and I am absolutely committed to continuing to do that.
On the issue of enforcement, I think some of the criticism was somewhat unwarranted. This is an issue that I have regularly championed. I agree with the principles of what colleagues have said, but I point out that in November the National Crime Agency announced that, based on the intelligence it gained in Operation Destabilise, it supported international law enforcement partners in seizing $24 million and over €2.6 million from Russian money laundering networks with links to drugs and organised crime. There have been over 128 arrests as a result of that operation alone, with over £25 million seized in cash and cryptocurrency—another issue that has been mentioned. In 2025 alone, OFSI issued four major civil monetary penalties, totalling over £900,000—I think some of the figures Members have used are not quite accurate—and for its part, HMRC concluded a £1.1 million compound settlement for trade sanctions breaches in May.
The shadow Minister asked for figures. I am happy to write to her with further details, but to give one example, OTSI has received reports or referrals about 146 potential breaches of sanctions and it has a number of investigations under way. I do not want to comment on them, but I do want to assure hon. Members that we take all the considerations they have raised very seriously. Sanctions, including Magnitsky-related sanctions, are an important tool, and we will continue to look at all such possibilities. I welcome the challenge, and we will continue to rigorously pursue not only the designation of such regimes, but, crucially, the enforcement that makes the difference.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I call Sir Iain Duncan Smith to wind up very quickly.
Chagossians and the Diego Garcia Base Treaty
Stephen Doughty Excerpts(1 month ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)
The Diego Garcia treaty, signed by the UK on 22 May 2025, secures the future of the strategically critical UK-US military base on Diego Garcia. This base is vital for UK defence and intelligence capabilities, and the safety and security of the British people.
The Government also worked to ensure that the treaty includes important provisions for Chagossians, including the establishment of a trust fund to benefit the community and a route to resettle the islands of the Chagos archipelago other than Diego Garcia. These and other related Chagossian issues have been the subject of significant debate in both Houses. The Government are pleased to update the House on recent developments.
Chagossian Trust Fund
Under the terms of the treaty, the UK will capitalise a £40 million trust fund for the benefit of Chagossians, which will be established by Mauritius. On 12 December, the Mauritian Government approved introduction of primary legislation to establish the trust fund. The Bill will be published on the website of the Mauritian Parliament and can be viewed on the Government Information Service portal of the Government of Mauritius https://gis.govmu.org It confirms the principle that the trust fund will be operated for Chagossians, by Chagossians.
Decisions on the use of funds will be taken by a trust fund management board. The board will comprise 12 members, seven of whom will be Chagossian, ensuring majority representation. The chair of the trust fund will be a Chagossian, selected by the Chagossian members of the board. Following extensive representations and engagement by this Government, the Bill also now confirms that a UK-based Chagossian representative will sit on the board alongside representatives living in Mauritius and the Seychelles. The UK High Commissioner to Mauritius will also attend board meetings.
We welcome these commitments by Mauritius which will ensure the trust fund reflects the full spectrum of perspectives within the Chagossian community.
Eligibility to Participate in a Programme of Resettlement
The treaty enables Mauritius to develop a programme of resettlement on islands other than Diego Garcia. This agreement is the only viable path to resettlement on the archipelago. The UK Government have been in talks with Mauritius to ensure that this programme is open to all Chagossians, irrespective of their country of residence. The Mauritian Government confirmed on 12 December that eligibility to resettle will apply to Chagossians born on the archipelago before 31 December 1973, and children of parents either of whom were born on the archipelago before that date.
UK-based Chagossians who do not hold Mauritian citizenship and meet these criteria will be eligible for Mauritian citizenship, and therefore able to participate in any future programme of resettlement. All Chagossians will remain eligible for British citizenship under the current citizenship pathway. Chagossians will be able to hold both British and Mauritian citizenship.
Mauritius has also confirmed that civil status documents issued by the Government of Mauritius will continue to record the place of birth as the Chagos archipelago for all of those born there. Where, for any reason, this has not been the case, the Government of Mauritius will review and amend the documents as necessary.
Mauritian Criminal Code Amendment
On 29 October, the Mauritius Criminal Code (Amendment No.2) Act 2025 came into force, repealing section 76B of the Mauritian criminal code and removing the offence of
“misrepresenting the sovereignty of Mauritius by producing, distributing, supply or marketing any coin, stamp, official map or official object or document.”
Concerns had been raised that Chagossians might face prosecution for expressing their affiliation with the UK. Although no one was ever prosecuted under this law, we recognise the impact it was having on the Chagossian community and welcome the steps taken by the Mauritian Government to have section 76B of the Mauritian criminal code repealed.
Heritage Visits to the Chagos Archipelago
Both the UK Government and the Republic of Mauritius recognise the importance of heritage visits for the Chagossian community and remain committed to facilitating a programme of heritage visits to the Chagos archipelago, including Diego Garcia. We will work together to resume a programme of visits to the archipelago.
Chagossian Support Programme—Supporting Chagossians in our Communities
Separate to the treaty, the Government are increasing support for Chagossians living in the UK through both new and existing initiatives. This includes support for newly arrived British citizens and a wide range of projects that will benefit the Chagossian community.
Chagossian Contact Group
The Chagossian contact group provides Chagossians with a role in decision-making on the UK Government’s support for their community. On 11 November, we committed to exploring ways to enhance the group by increasing its transparency and frequency, provided that the contact group’s existing members agreed. FCDO officials have discussed this with contact group members, who are now consulting with the wider community ahead of making decisions. We will provide a further update once these are received.
[HCWS1166]
Oral Answers to Questions
Stephen Doughty Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)
We collaborate closely with our international partners to deter and disrupt the perpetrators of malicious cyber-activity and to hold them to account. Just last month, the United Kingdom, along with the United States and Australia, sanctioned Media Land, a major Russian cyber-crime syndicate that enabled ransomware and phishing attacks against UK businesses, underscoring our commitment to tackling illicit cyber-activity.
Rachel Taylor
The past year has seen cyber-attacks on some of our biggest household names, including Jaguar Land Rover, putting jobs and livelihoods in my constituency of North Warwickshire and Bedworth at risk. What action is the Minister taking with the UK’s partners overseas to tackle this growing threat, both in our country and throughout the world?
Stephen Doughty
My hon. Friend raises a crucial issue on behalf of her constituents. Incidents such as the attack on Jaguar Land Rover serve as a stark reminder that cyber-threat is not just an abstract concept, but one that has real-world costs. We are working closely with international partners. We are a founding member of the Counter Ransomware Initiative that in October led the agreement of supply chain resilience guidance endorsed by 67 countries, and we are working closely with other partners through the United Nations and other bodies.
Rishi Sunak (Richmond and Northallerton) (Con)
In the past 12 months, nationally significant cyber-incidents have doubled, many backed by hostile foreign states, as the Minister will know. The National Cyber Force is clear that offensive cyber-operations play a part in ensuring our national security, so given the environment in which our adversaries are co-operating, will the Minister continue to deepen our co-operation with our Five Eyes partners in this domain, not least because I know at first hand how much they value the particular capabilities that the UK brings to bear in this area?
Stephen Doughty
The former Prime Minister is absolutely right to raise this issue. The level of hostile state activity is significant and it is growing. That is why we are working closely with international partners. We have provided almost £30 million in support for international cyber-security capacity building, including for Ukraine and working with other partners. We are also working on issues such as sanctions: we have sanctioned 26 cyber-criminal support entities linked to malicious cyber-activity and 16 Russian military intelligence officers, including an attribution of cyber-units within the GRU, so our co-operation with Five Eyes partners and others is crucial.
Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)
The whole House and country should rightly be concerned about cyber-attacks, from malign cyber-activity directed at MPs and the Electorate Commission, to Chinese companies linked to global malicious cyber-campaigns. When will this Government stand up to China and address this threat? When will they send a strong message to the Chinese Communist party by blocking its super-embassy application and finally placing China on the enhanced tier of the foreign influence registration scheme?
Stephen Doughty
I have been very clear about just how seriously we take the activity from different states in the cyber domain, and its significance is growing. As I have pointed out, we are working closely with international partners. The hon. Gentleman will understand that I will not go into the detail of all our work on that, but I commend the work of our National Cyber Security Centre with businesses, individuals and this place to ensure that our resilience is in place. We will continue to work with international partners to counter these threats.
Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)
Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)
We are working across Government to build a new strategic partnership with the EU. The Foreign Secretary and I meet regularly with European partners, and I will be doing so later this week. Last month I joined the Foreign Secretary and the Defence Secretary for the first foreign and security policy dialogue with EU High Representative Kallas. Collaborative relationships are key to building this partnership and delivering what the British people want—on growth, the cost of living, security and action to counter irregular migration.
Dr Pinkerton
With growing Chinese espionage, Russian aggression on the European continent and a capricious President in the United States, it is more important than ever that we deepen our security co-operation with our European allies. Can I ask the Minister explicitly whether he recognises, as I do, that the UK’s deepest possible participation in the EU’s Security Action for Europe scheme is vital to common European security? What have he and the Government done to try to prompt the restart of the negotiations with the European Union that sadly broke down last week?
Stephen Doughty
Our security and defence partnership is broad. The UK entered discussions with the EU on the SAFE scheme in good faith, recognising mutual strategic interest and continued commitment. We were clear with the EU that we were prepared to make a fair financial contribution that reflects the potential for a mutually beneficial relationship and value for the taxpayer. However, we have always said that we will not sign deals unless they are genuinely in the national interest, and in this case the deal on offer from the EU did not pass that test. But I am absolutely confident that our wider defence and industrial relationships are not affected. In fact, our deal with Norway on frigates, our £8 billion agreement with Turkey for the purchase of 20 Typhoon jets, and our agreement with Germany on joint export campaigns in relation to Boxer armoured vehicles all very much represent the very best of European defence industrial co-operation.
Dame Nia Griffith (Llanelli) (Lab)
I know that the Minister appreciates the need for the EU and the UK to work very closely together in the face of global security threats and trade challenges. In his talks with EU colleagues, will he impress on them the damage that the proposed EU steel tariffs would do to not just our UK steel industry but manufacturing across the UK and the EU?
Stephen Doughty
My hon. Friend has always been a very strong advocate for the steel industry. I can confirm that we are absolutely committed to defending our steel industry. We are seeking an urgent clarification from the EU Commission on its proposals. We need to find a bilateral solution. Any EU measures must, of course, be consistent with the trade and co-operation agreement and uphold summit commitments and, indeed, our Windsor framework obligations.
David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)
Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Con)
Last month, the Government buckled under pressure about their lack of consultation with the Chagossian people on the shameful handover of sovereign British territory to Mauritius. If the process is genuinely intended to inform policy, what steps will the Minister take to ensure that the views expressed to the House of Lords International Relations and Defence Committee are free from external interference? How will its findings inform the Government’s decision on the future of the Chagos islands?
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)
As the hon. Gentleman knows, the Committee is engaging a wide range of Chagossians to ascertain their views on the implications of the treaty and will produce a report before Christmas. We have seen no evidence of Mauritian interference, and it is important to recognise the wide range of views in the Chagossian community. I very much look forward to reading the IRDC’s report when it is completed.
Andrew Rosindell
I hope the Minister will check that there are actually Chagossians and not outsiders taking part in that consultation. Anyway, let us try something else.
Given last week’s report that the Chancellor had a £4 billion surplus rather than a £20 billion deficit as previously suggested, will the Minister explain why the Government are pressing ahead with this eye-wateringly expensive £35 billion gift of British sovereign territory to Mauritius? Does the Minister not agree that scrapping that atrocious deal would be a better way to help the Chancellor restore fiscal credibility and save British taxpayers’ money?
Stephen Doughty
No matter how many times the hon. Gentleman repeats his wild claims about the cost of the deal, they are no more correct. I have been clear on multiple occasions about the cost of the deal. We will not scrimp on the national security of this country. The base is crucial for our security and that of our allies, and we have set out the costs very clearly.
Mrs Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)
James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)
Stephen Doughty
My hon. Friend raises a crucial point. We work closely with our partners on that issue and support democratic institutions and values, including through the Westminster Foundation for Democracy. We fund election observation, champion media freedom and provide leadership in different fora, and we will set that as a key priority as incoming co-chair of the Open Government Partnership.
Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)
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?
Stephen Doughty
The hon. Member can find the communiqué online. The Economic Secretary to the Treasury and I met the leaders from the overseas territories last week at a successful Joint Ministerial Council, and I again set out clearly our expectations on registers of beneficial ownership. I would point out that all OTs with financial centres have committed to upholding international tax standards, including those on tax transparency and exchange of information, as well as base erosion and profit sharing.
Harpreet Uppal (Huddersfield) (Lab)
Since the beginning of 2025, the United Nations Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs has documented more than 1,600 attacks in the west bank perpetrated by Israeli settlers. What more can the UK do in terms of sanctions for illegal settler outposts and settlement trade and to hold the Israeli Government to account?
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?
Stephen Doughty
As the Foreign Secretary made clear a moment ago, the UK is not involved in these operations. There have been reports overnight, of which we do not know the full details and which the US will respond to. We have been very clear that we expect all nations to operate in line with international law.
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?
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
The child nutrition fund is one of the most effective ways to enhance the impact and value for money of official development assistance spending by mobilising domestic resources, with philanthropic and private capital having the potential to multiply UK ODA contributions as much as sixfold. In 2023, the UK Government committed to a £16 million contribution to fund. Will Ministers confirm that the commitment will be honoured despite the changes in ODA spending?
Stephen Doughty
The right hon. Member has been a long-standing champion of these issues. We reaffirmed our commitment to addressing malnutrition at the Nutrition for Growth summit in 2025, as he knows, and we continue to support the child nutrition fund, which funds treatment of acute malnutrition. We are providing technical assistance and are supporting countries to integrate nutrition across sectors.
Baggy Shanker (Derby South) (Lab/Co-op)
With winter setting in and thousands of Gazan children still acutely malnourished, will my right hon. Friend work with international partners so we can go further and faster to help those children?
Jessica Morden (Newport East) (Lab)
We have seen a year of protests in Georgia against democratic backsliding and crackdowns on political opponents, which are deeply concerning, including for those in Newport with strong links to Kutaisi. What more can be done with allies to increase diplomatic pressure?
Stephen Doughty
We are deeply concerned by the democratic backsliding in Georgia and have issued a number of sanctions, as my hon. Friend will be aware. I have raised concerns directly with Georgian Dream representatives and will continue to follow the situation closely.
Sir Oliver Dowden (Hertsmere) (Con)
Today is UAE National Day, marking 54 years since its full independence. In that time, it has become one of our nation’s staunchest allies and a key investor, benefiting constituencies up and down the country. Will the Minister join me, as chairman of the all-party parliamentary group, in congratulating the UAE and recommitting to this key strategic relationship?
Antarctic Strategy
Stephen Doughty Excerpts(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)
The Government are today publishing a UK Antarctic strategy. This sets out the UK’s aims and ambitions for the Antarctic for the next decade.
The strategy brings together the UK’s approach to the Antarctic under a single document for the first time. It outlines the full range of UK interests in Antarctica that shape our engagement in the region, and our priorities looking ahead.
At a time of growing global interest in Antarctica, our approach will see the UK continuing to play an active and leading role in the Antarctic treaty system, upholding our rights and responsibilities and reiterating the importance of international collaboration. We will also safeguard our sovereignty of the British Antarctic Territory, ensuring the effective administration of the territory.
Our long-term strategic objective remains for the Antarctic to be a place dedicated to peace and science, characterised by co-operation.
The UK will focus activity across four areas.
Governance and UK sovereign interests: Antarctic matters are characterised by international co-operation, which the UK will seek to enhance. We also want to celebrate our long-standing connection with Antarctica and why it matters to the UK. The UK will continue to chair the commission for the conservation of Antarctic marine living resources to 2026 and to work with parties on the sustainable management of Antarctic marine resources.
Science: we will continue to invest in our world-leading polar infrastructure, ensuring that the British Antarctic Survey and UK researchers have the platforms they need to carry out the science we all need to protect Antarctica and the UK from the impacts of climate change, including our continued programme of infrastructure work at Rothera research station. The focus of UK science is on climate change, with projects looking at the rate of sea ice loss and glacier retreat, and ongoing work to drill ice cores, which can give a better understanding of a changing climate and the subsequent impacts for the world.
Environmental protection: the UK will continue to advocate for enhanced environmental protection for Antarctica, including for British heritage in the region, working with the UK Antarctic Heritage Trust. We will continue to push for greater protection of Shackleton’s famous ship Endurance, to identify sites for designation as Antarctic specially protected areas, and to advocate for specially protected species status for the iconic emperor penguin.
Ensuring peaceful and lawful use: we will continue to work closely with Antarctic partners to ensure we uphold the principles of the Antarctic treaty system, including the environmental protocol’s ban on commercial mineral resource activity. We will also work with parties on continued negotiations to develop a framework for the management of Antarctic tourism, ensuring it is safe and environmentally responsible, and does not unduly impact the Antarctic environment.
Through this new strategy, the UK will draw on our years of Antarctic experience and expertise to ensure Antarctica remains a continent preserved for peace and science.
We are publishing this strategy on Antarctica Day, which commemorates the signing of the Antarctic treaty in 1959. 66 years after this vital international agreement was signed, the UK is committing further to Antarctica. On this anniversary, we wish all of those working in Antarctica well.
[HCWS1113]
Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe
Stephen Doughty Excerpts(2 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)
The right hon. Member for Sheffield Heeley (Louise Haigh) has been appointed as a full representative of the United Kingdom delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe in place of the hon. Member for High Peak (Jon Pearce).
The hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) has been appointed as a full, representative of the United Kingdom delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe in place of the hon. Member for Tunbridge Wells (Mike Martin).
The hon. Member for Newton Abbott (Martin Wrigley) has been appointed as a substitute member of the United Kingdom delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe in place of the hon. Member for Lewes (James MacCleary).
[HCWS1035]
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe: UK Delegation
Stephen Doughty Excerpts(2 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)
The right hon. Lord Jones of Pennybont has been appointed as the Leader of the UK delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in place of the right hon. Lord Touhig.
The hon. Member for Gedling (Michael Payne) has been appointed as a full member of the United Kingdom Delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in place of the hon. Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson).
[HCWS1038]
NATO Parliamentary Assembly: UK Delegation
Stephen Doughty Excerpts(2 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)
The hon. Member for Enfield North (Feryal Clark) has replaced the hon. Member for Barking (Nesil Caliskan) as a member of the United Kingdom delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.
[HCWS1037]