Outcome of the EU Referendum

Stephen Doughty Excerpts

Monday 27th June 2016 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I can certainly give that assurance. This is an important industry for our country; it is 7% of the economy. The jobs in Scotland, in Bristol and in Bournemouth are just as valuable as the jobs in London, and I want to keep as many of them as possible.

[Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op)]

One of my local councillors in Butetown was told this weekend to

“get out of the country”,

and a former Tory candidate, Shazia Awan, in Caerphilly, was told:

“I cannot wait to send you and the anti-white garbage that you stand for back to the third world dumps that you came from.”

Will the Prime Minister send a clear and unequivocal message from this House to that small number of people—and some leaders of other political parties—that if you indulge and stoke fear, you generate hate?

[The Prime Minister]

I would add to that: you not only generate hate, but you commit a crime and you can be prosecuted—and the police should not hold back.

Tributes to Jo Cox

Stephen Doughty Excerpts

Monday 20th June 2016 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op)]

In a tale of another Yorkshire tragedy that led to action and hope in the midst of sadness, we are told:

“The flowers of Yorkshire are like the women of Yorkshire. Every stage of their growth has its own beauty, but the last phase is always the most glorious.”

And it was glorious, Jo.

I was in awe of Jo. To be honest, I was always a bit envious. She was energetic, brave, dynamic, fit, beautiful and passionate. I cannot ever recall seeing her sad, negative or without hope. She once told me, in a one-to-one meeting as my manager at Oxfam, that she did not do touchy-feely, that I was being too emotional, that we needed to “get on with it” and sort out the campaign we were working on.

Jo believed in building bridges. She was fiercely Labour to her core, but when we thought our party was on the way out of government, she knew there were bigger things at stake. We had to reach out to others: we had to convince them of the case for tackling global poverty and for standing up for civilians in conflict and crisis and for women and girls. She was never satisfied with platitudes. She wanted action. We have all been overwhelmed over the last few days with just how many lives she touched, from the refugee camps of Darfur to the mountains of Pakistan, but she was not some do-gooder jetting in to hand out alms. She wanted to know why, who was responsible and what we could do about it.

Jo had a remarkable mind and an incredible ability to multi-task. I once met her to go to lobby some very senior officials in the Foreign Office about various crises. She turned up, typically, in a rush with her climbing kit hanging out of her bag. We sat on the floor in King Charles Street, where she then jumped straight into reading a briefing. She knew exactly what the key points were within minutes and then delivered the crucial information to the decision makers with utter confidence and assuredness. It was brilliant. That brilliance was universally felt by all those she worked with. Moira described her as a

“fearless, compassionate professional with such an impish streak.”

Vicky said that Jo had smarts and spirit. Conor, who worked closely with her, said that she taught him

“how to get stuff done … with passion and professionalism”.

Our friend Ben, who spent a famous night on a mountain with her in Pakistani Kashmir, reminded our friends in recent days that everyone assumes that in NGOs people must all be really kind. He said:

“But the truth is we are not ... we can be vain, arrogant and mean… not Jo. Not just did everyone like Jo. More impressively Jo liked everyone. She was furious at injustice … but saw no one as a permanent enemy, and everyone as a potential ally.”

Though Jo was kind, she was a steely edged campaigner. Our friend and colleague Phil Bloomer said that she was

“one of the most kind, caring and committed people I have had the privilege to know … but she could also make herself a right royal pain in the back-side if she profoundly disagreed with you: a lesson many political leaders learnt too late, and to their cost.”

He reflected on Jo’s years influencing Peter Mandelson when she headed Oxfam’s Brussels office at a young age. He had to quickly adapt his approach. But most of all, Phil hit the mark. He said:

“Jo loved justice ... Jo loved Love”.

Adrian, our friend, told me of the time he saw Jo just a few months ago over a sandwich. He told me that he

“saw again the bravery and determination as she figured out how to hold feet to the fire—in her own party as well as her opponents—over Syria and the good we failed to do.”

Our close mutual friend and campaigner Kirsty summed Jo up perfectly for me. She said that Jo

“never just asked ‘what do you think?’ always ‘what should we do’. This is what we should do. Act. Love. Unite.”

That was the Jo I knew. Kind, caring, passionate, principled, thoughtful—an intellect, but most of all focused on doing for others, not just being for ourselves.

ISIL in Syria

Stephen Doughty Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd December 2015 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I have made my views clear about the importance of all of us fighting terrorism, and I think that it is time to move on.

[Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op)]

rose—

[Albert Owen (Ynys Môn) (Lab)]

rose—

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

I will give way to the hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty).

[Stephen Doughty]

I thank the Prime Minister for giving way. I would have preferred to hear an apology, but I want to discuss the facts. The fact is that we are proposing to target very different things from those that we are targeting in northern Iraq and I would like to ask the Prime Minister two questions. First, what practical steps will be used to reduce civilian casualties? Secondly, what sorts of targets will we be going against that will reduce the terrorist threat to the UK in terms of operations directed against our citizens?

[The Prime Minister]

Let me answer the hon. Gentleman very directly. On the sorts of targets that we can go after, clearly it is the leaders of this death cult itself, the training camps, the communications hubs and those who are plotting against us. As I shall argue in a minute, the limited action that we took against Khan and Hussain, which was, if you like, an airstrikes on Syria, has already had an impact on ISIL—on Daesh. That is a very important point.

How do we avoid civilian casualties? We have a policy—a start point—of wanting zero civilian casualties. One year and three months into those Iraqi operations, we have not had any reports of civilian casualties. I am not saying that there are no casualties in war; of course there are. We are putting ourselves into a very difficult situation, which is hugely complex. In many ways it is a difficult argument to get across, but its heart is a simple point—will we be safer and better off in the long term if we can get rid of the so-called caliphate which is radicalising Muslims, turning people against us and plotting atrocities on the streets of Britain?

--- Later in debate ---

[Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op)]

In 2013 I voted against military action in Syria, and I was happy to do so, because I did not think that the case had been made or that a plan was in place. I thought that through extraordinarily carefully, because I was very conscious of what the Assad regime was doing, and is still doing, to civilians in Syria. In all the sound and fury and rhetoric around that debate and this debate, it is absolutely vital to cut through and get to the heart of what we are actually discussing. I am very much taken with what has been said about this being an extension of existing action. This is not about starting a war or carpet bombing civilians, as one person has suggested to me; it is about extending military action against a barbarous regime that threatens our own citizens.

Like the hon. Member for Congleton (Fiona Bruce), I believe what is proposed meets the criteria of a just war. It meets the criteria on legality, proportionality, prospects of success and last resort. We also have a clear UN resolution. The idea has been put around that we somehow need a chapter 7 resolution, but that is simply not the case. The House of Commons Library has set out the situation carefully, stating:

“Phrases such as ‘all necessary measures’, as used in UNSCR 2249, are usually code for the use of force in other Security Council Resolutions…It is immaterial that they do not mention using force.”

It then points to a number of examples of different ways in which the UN has argued for that.

There is a case for self-defence in international law. There is also a case for operating against a non-state actor that threatens us when the sovereign state in that area is unable or unwilling to act against it. We have a call from our allies, from France and others, including Jordan and the United Arab Emirates, and the Germans are getting involved as well. There is also the military practicality to consider, with this imaginary border on which we can only operate on one side.

Then there is the direct threat to the UK and our citizens. I say that carefully, because of the individuals who were recruited from my constituency and went to fight in Syria. They communicated with people in this country and may well have been involved in plots against this country. That is a very serious thing to consider, because dealing with Daesh’s ideology will require more than a military strategy. We also have to tackle it here, for example by disrupting its communications methods, and in terms of security, tackling ideology, community relations and local policing. As long as that regime remains a beacon in the region, inspiring, recruiting and directing people, we will continue to have a problem, even if we meet all the other criteria.

I have my doubts about ground troops and the hopes being placed in the political process, and I have concerns about the Government’s failure to follow through on reconstruction in the past. However, we cannot let perfection be the enemy. I have had to consider whether those concerns outweigh the reasons I outlined at the beginning of my remarks. My answer is no, which is why I will be supporting the Government’s motion tonight.

Syria

Stephen Doughty Excerpts

Thursday 26th November 2015 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

As I have always said, my door is open to the Leader of the Opposition. He and his team had a briefing from my national security adviser last night and asked a series of questions that I think got some comprehensive answers. If we decide to go ahead with a vote, having seen a sign of significant support across the House, I will try to draft the broadest possible motion that will attract the widest possible support. If people have suggestions about what they would like to see in that motion, I would be very happy to hear from them.

[Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op)]

Let me bring the Prime Minister back to the direct threat to our own constituencies. He will be well aware of individuals from my constituency who were groomed and travelled to fight for Daesh and of an individual from Cardiff city who is believed to have posed a direct threat to the UK as a result of his activities with Daesh. Will he say more about the necessity of going after Daesh in the territory that it controls and how that impacts on actions here, recruitments and actions against this country’s citizens?

[The Prime Minister]

The hon. Gentleman makes a very important point, which is why our military objectives are not simply the elimination of terrorist networks, training camps and the rest. While this so-called caliphate exists, and while it is able to broadcast its poison and its message, it is—shockingly—attracting people from right across the world. It does not matter which President or Prime Minister I speak to—I had talks with the Prime Minister of Canada last night, for example, and I shall see many others at the Commonwealth Heads of Government conference from all over the world. As long as this so-called caliphate exists, it attracts young people and poses risks to us all.

National Security and Defence

Stephen Doughty Excerpts

Monday 23rd November 2015 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I am very grateful for my hon. Friend’s support. He is very knowledgeable about these issues, and I am glad he thinks we made the right choices.

[Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op)]

There is much to welcome in the Prime Minister’s statement, particularly what he said about deployable forces, but like some Members on the Government Benches, I have concerns about whether 82,000 regular Army personnel are enough to meet some of the challenges, and the scale of those challenges, particularly given what we have seen happening in reserve recruitment. Can the Prime Minister see any circumstance in which he may feel a need to increase regular personnel to meet the challenges out there?

[The Prime Minister]

Remember that the figure of 82,000 was always on the basis that we would have the 35,000 reserves. Recent figures have shown that we are now getting ahead of the targets that we set, and I pay tribute to the hard-working ministerial team. We need to make sure that we reach that 35,000. What the report today shows—I am sure the hon. Gentleman will want to look at it in detail—is that because we are changing the way that the Army works, over time we will be able to deliver two strike brigades, rather than one, and a force of 50,000, rather than a force of 30,000, showing that we can get more for the 82,000 than we had set out.

Syria: Refugees and Counter-terrorism

Stephen Doughty Excerpts

Monday 7th September 2015 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

We will certainly look at that. As I have said, we should look at vulnerable groups. That can include Yazidis, Christians and others who are vulnerable not just in Syria right now but, potentially, in the situations in which they find themselves outside Syria.

[Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op)]

There can be no starker contrast than that between the overwhelming majority of young people in my constituency and that of my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff West (Kevin Brennan), who utterly condemn the activities of Daesh, and the actions of Reyaad Khan and the two individuals from my constituency who regrettably associated with him and also travelled to fight in Syria. Clearly, the Prime Minister and his Ministers have difficult decisions to take when there is a threat to this country. Will he meet me and my hon. Friend to discuss the circumstances and the nature of what happened and, most importantly, to discuss what we can do better together to tackle the extremists who are trying to recruit individuals from our shores in order to prevent further young people from getting involved with this barbarous organisation?

[The Prime Minister]

It is certainly a matter of huge regret when young people from our constituencies get involved in extremism and violence, and when they travel to Syria or Iraq and take part in these dreadful events. I will consult the Defence Secretary to see whether he can host a meeting with MPs who have particular concerns to raise.

Tunisia, and European Council

Stephen Doughty Excerpts

Monday 29th June 2015 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I do not want to disappoint my hon. Friend too much, but actually the reception I have had from my fellow European Prime Ministers and Presidents has been rather more positive than he suggests.

[Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op)]

My thoughts and prayers are with those caught up in the horrific events in Tunisia, including those from Cardiff. What consideration has the Prime Minister given to reviewing and, if necessary, upgrading our support and training security forces in other countries where British civilians and interests may be under threat from Daesh? Will he put those considerations at the heart of the upcoming strategic defence and security review?

[The Prime Minister]

The hon. Gentleman makes a very important point. The SDSR should be about these issues, as well as the more traditional issues of protecting and defending Britain herself. We are a country where our people work, travel and live in all sorts of different countries. Making sure we work with those countries to enhance their security is an important part of what we do.

Food Banks

Stephen Doughty Excerpts

Wednesday 17th December 2014 Commons Chamber

[Mr Wilson]

As the report recognised, the reasons people are using food banks are very complex and frequently overlap. There is no one reason that explains the growth in their use in the UK or in other parts of the western world.

[Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op)]

rose—

[Mr Wilson]

I will come to the hon. Gentleman in a moment if he will let me make a little more progress, because I want to talk about a personal experience.

Last month, I visited a Tesco superstore in my constituency to thank shoppers and volunteers for all their fantastic efforts in supporting the neighbourhood food collection. The collection was held in conjunction with the Trussell Trust and FareShare, with Tesco topping up shoppers’ donations by 30%.

--- Later in debate ---

[Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op)]

The hon. Member for Truro and Falmouth (Sarah Newton), who is no longer in her place, spoke of being disappointed with aspects of this debate. Well, I was disappointed that the Minister came to the Dispatch Box with a folder full of facts and statistics on the economy, food waste, the performance of the Department for Work and Pensions, and many other issues, yet he could not bring himself to admit why people are going to food banks in this country. For the benefit of the House, I will add some examples that I have heard, which back up what the Trussell Trust, independent food banks and many others are saying: the use of food banks is caused by changes and delays in the benefit system, debt, and, increasingly, people with low incomes who made up 22% of cases this year, up from 16% the year before. Those are the facts, and it is a shame that the Minister—unlike some Government Members who were far more candid and open—was unable to state them. Perhaps the Minister who winds up the debate will be clearer.

I pay tribute to the many volunteers and organisations in my constituency, including Cardiff food bank, which is part of the Trussell Trust network and fed more than 4,500 people in the past year. The independent food bank at Tabernacle Baptist church in Penarth fed an increasing number of people this year—2,180 to date, and that number is increasing all the time. It repeats to me the same reasons for why people come to it.

I pay tribute to those volunteers, many of whom come to me and ask, “Why?” That is the fundamental question that the Government have failed to answer today. From my experience in international development, the same question is asked about poverty and injustice around the world. We see people who are facing disaster and we ask why they are vulnerable to disaster. It is because they are living in poverty. Why are they living in poverty? It is often of the systems, policies and processes of Governments and others that leave them in that place in the first place. One member of staff I worked with at the charity World Vision once spoke to me about a pit in the world of poverty, with a big digger digging it out. Organisations such as food banks can put rocks back into the pit to try to fill it back up. Ultimately, however, they cannot stop the digger digging it out. The digger in this case are the Government, with policies such as the bedroom tax and punitive sanctions, and policies that fail to deal with energy prices and the cost of living. That is the digger and that is what we have to switch off. The Government would do well to listen, rather than trying to undermine the organisations that are speaking up for so many across the country.

Murder of Lee Rigby

Stephen Doughty Excerpts

Tuesday 25th November 2014 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op)]

I associate myself with the comments of the Prime Minister and many other hon. Members about Fusilier Lee Rigby. The Prime Minister has repeatedly referred to the importance of schools and universities in tackling the threat from radicalisation, yet I have spoken to many young people who are concerned about the absence of, or lack of consistency in information provided to them about how to report and tackle extremism that they find online. I am concerned that it appears that there have been no inter-ministerial meetings about that issue between the devolved Administrations and UK Ministers with responsibility for education and universities. Will the Prime Minister commit to working with education and universities Ministers across the UK to ensure that consistent information is provided to our young people, teachers and youth workers?

[The Prime Minister]

The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. That is one of the reasons for having the public duty on public bodies, including universities, to combat extremism and terrorism. We will set out the guidance on that as the legislation goes through the House. It is important to ensure that this happens on a UK-wide basis. Combating terrorism is a reserved, UK-wide responsibility. We need to discuss with the devolved authorities exactly how they put that in place, but obviously whether it is done is a matter for the UK Government.

Iraq: Coalition Against ISIL

Stephen Doughty Excerpts

Friday 26th September 2014 Commons Chamber

[Dr Liam Fox (North Somerset) (Con)]

The threats that ISIL poses are very clear. The humanitarian outrages that it has already perpetrated have been on our television screens and in our newspapers. ISIL threatens the destabilisation of the region and an all-out religious war. It will be a global exporter of jihad if we allow it to be. Therefore, the question of whether to act or not is a relatively simple one. However, in choosing to act, we must do so politically, economically and militarily, all in concert. Politically, we need greater regional support even than we have had until now. That includes Turkey, which is a key player in the region and a strong NATO ally. We also need a clear view from the regional powers on exactly what political shape they want to achieve in the region. If anything, the lesson we learned from Iraq is that military victory, where it is possible, is only the beginning of a much more difficult process.

[Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op)]

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that countries, including Turkey, Cyprus and others, in the region need to do much more to disrupt the flow of fighters from Europe and elsewhere to Iraq and Syria and indeed back here, if possible?

[Dr Fox]

It is the duty of all those who wish to see international order maintained to do everything in their power to disrupt the flow of such people.

All conflicts are ideological and this conflict is no different. We require political and religious leaders in the region to be much more vocal about the fact that this has nothing to do with Islam, that it is a cruel, barbaric, mediaeval and misogynistic creed, and that it is not religion but a political perversion. We also need to make those messages clear to those young, impressionable individuals in Britain who may be considering becoming involved in such an enterprise. Those who are already there need to understand that they are not welcome back in this country and that the full force of the law will be applied should they come back. They cannot take a jihad gap year and come back to the UK with impunity.

The question of oil has been mentioned but, through the international financial system, we also need to stop financial flows to ISIS. It is very well funded and we must stop groups in the region playing a double-game, publicly decrying ISIS but providing it with the funding it requires.

--- Later in debate ---

[Shabana Mahmood (Birmingham, Ladywood) (Lab)]

I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to the debate today. I will support the motion before the House, but I do so with deep concern and real worry about the future. That is not because I do not want ISIL to be destroyed—I do—but because I believe that our history in Iraq, with the war of 2003, has eroded trust, created suspicion about our motives for getting involved and perhaps caused some of the factors that has led us to where we are today. Without genuine, prolonged efforts to achieve a political settlement, I have fears about where this may ultimately end. I am deeply concerned about the potential scale of civilian deaths that may occur, bearing in mind the scale of those that have already occurred and that are occurring even as we speak. Such decisions are deeply difficult—I often feel that we have to choose between the lesser of two evils—but a political solution is the only way to ensure that peace can be won and, in the end, that it can be a lasting peace.

The starting point for making my decision is that those in ISIL are fanatics and monsters; they are not Muslims. They have hijacked the name of Islam, the religion that I, as well as tens of thousands of my constituents and hundreds of thousands of British Muslims, follow and practice, and which we all love. They have hijacked and dishonoured the name of our religion. I am a Sunni Muslim, like the majority of British Muslims, and like them I abhor and am repulsed by the fact that those in ISIL describe themselves as true Sunni Muslims: they are not, and we reject them utterly.

[Stephen Doughty]

My hon. Friend is making a crucial point. Will she join me in welcoming the fact that in Cardiff, as well as in many communities throughout the UK, Muslim leaders from across the Muslim spectrum and leaders from other communities and faiths have come together to condemn ISIL’s activities not only in Iraq and Syria, but in recruiting and perverting young people in this country?