Central and East Africa

Debate between Stephen Phillips and Lindsay Hoyle
Monday 25th January 2016

(8 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mary Creagh Portrait Mary Creagh (Wakefield) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I congratulate the hon. and learned Gentleman on securing this debate. On my visit to Burundi in 2009, I visited a Save the Children hospital that was helping women who needed Caesarean sections to deliver their babies safely. That was one of the many projects that we funded in country, and it made a real difference in a country where one in five under-fives did not make it to their fifth birthday. I agree that by withdrawing from the country, we have a lesser voice and less influence. I gently say to all hon. Members that what Chad and the Central African Republic have in common is their abject poverty and the fact that they are so-called aid orphans. There are ways to channel aid into those countries through the UN and perhaps through partnering with other Governments. We need to be a bit more flexible in the future.

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. It is intended that the opening speech lasts between 10 and 15 minutes. We are running over already and many Members wish to speak. I know that the hon. and learned Gentleman will want to conclude his speech shortly.

Stephen Phillips Portrait Stephen Phillips
- Hansard - -

I am grateful for your guidance, Mr Deputy Speaker. The hon. Lady makes a strong point. There is a balance to be struck between deciding whether aid will be displaced and the influence for good that British aid can have.

With your injunction in mind, Mr Deputy Speaker, let me move on to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which has similar problems. The constitution says that President Joseph Kabila must stand down this year, but many doubt that he will. He has been in charge since his father was assassinated in 2001. DRC has itself been the subject of an appalling civil war in the past and the worry must be that if he does not stand down, and instead seeks to circumvent the constitutional time limits, that will lead to violence and instability in the region.

There is also concern about the ongoing elections in the Central African Republic. Ongoing violence between rival Christian and Muslim armed groups since 2012 has displaced about 1 million people, and countless different militias control various parts of the country. Although the first round of presidential elections last month seems to have gone well and, thankfully, to have passed off peacefully, no winner has emerged yet and it is not entirely clear what is going on in the CAR and what the state of its Government is. It might be suggested that it is something of a tinderbox—some in the print media have said that—and if there is not a smooth run-off vote, that could spark a new round of violence.

The important point is about political stability. Constitutions are there to be observed, and if they are not—if people treat themselves as having a right to govern and to govern for as long as they want—that is detrimental to fragile democracies and is likely to lead to political violence, and runs the risk of leading to civil war. Such civil war is what Rwanda went through in 1994. One of my earliest political memories is of the appalling pictures we saw on our televisions of the genocide, in which approximately 1 million were killed during a period of several months. We must keep those images in mind, because we must try to avoid such a genocide and the political instability that leads to appalling acts of violence against the people of countries in the region, which in turn leads to our having to go into the region and spend British taxpayers’ money to try and restore order and stability, and can lead to problems on these shores in terms of economic migration and terrorism.

I said I would speak about eight countries, but with your injunction in mind, Mr Deputy Speaker, although I have spoken only about four or five I will conclude, as I know many Members wish to contribute. I look forward to hearing those contributions and the Minister’s position and that of the Opposition in due course.

Britain and International Security

Debate between Stephen Phillips and Lindsay Hoyle
Thursday 2nd July 2015

(9 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Stephen Phillips Portrait Stephen Phillips
- Hansard - -

I recognise that, and I am coming on to it, although it is always difficult to condense—

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. and learned Gentleman is out of time.

Stephen Phillips Portrait Stephen Phillips
- Hansard - -

It is always difficult to condense a longer speech into a shorter speech, but I will take the injunction from the Chair.

In closing, this is a problem that Ministers must not forget. Of course the threat from Daesh is critical and something with which we must deal, but the threat of Islamist terrorism across Africa is also a very real threat. It threatens us here. I hope that the Minister will say that it is a matter of which the Foreign Office is aware and on which it will concentrate.

Immigration Bill

Debate between Stephen Phillips and Lindsay Hoyle
Tuesday 22nd October 2013

(11 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Stephen Phillips Portrait Stephen Phillips
- Hansard - -

I am grateful for that intervention, and I am sure that when the right hon. Member for Tottenham has finished his private conversation, he will read it in Hansard in due course.

The hon. Member for Hackney North and Stoke Newington referred to the 1905 royal commission on alien immigration. During the course of that commission, as she will know, one of the larger pieces of evidence was given by the then Member for Stepney, Major Evans Gordon. He had written a book two years before the royal commission, and in the preface he wrote:

“The Alien Immigrant has been the subject of prolonged and bitter controversy, in which both sides have been guilty of some exaggeration. On the one hand, there are those who uphold the newcomers as an unmixed advantage in this country; on the other, there are many who denounce their advent as an unmitigated evil.”

I have to say to Opposition Members that that is a debate from which we have moved on. There is no doubt, in 2013, that we have welcomed those who have come to this country to benefit the United Kingdom, and that we have always welcomed those who have had to come here as a result of threats to their health and safety because of events in their home countries.

It is impossible to be a constituency MP in 2013 without those we represent, on whichever side of the House we sit, talking extensively about immigration. They do so because of the damning record of the previous Government, who effectively had open borders and let 3 million people into this country. Three times as many people entered this country between 1997 and 2010 as came here between the Conquest and 1950. [Interruption.] If Opposition Members would stop shouting and actually listen to me and their constituents, they would learn why this is such an important issue. It is so important because of the pressure it has put on public services and because of the way the people of this country have reacted to that open border immigration policy, which has resulted in much of the tolerance for which this country is famed going out of the window. [Interruption.]

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am sure the hon. Member for Slough (Fiona Mactaggart) did not mean that and will withdraw the comment.

Treaty on Stability, Co-ordination and Governance

Debate between Stephen Phillips and Lindsay Hoyle
Wednesday 29th February 2012

(12 years, 8 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Stephen Phillips Portrait Stephen Phillips
- Hansard - -

If the hon. Lady had actually read the fiscal compact treaty, and if she had been here when my hon. Friend the Member for North East Somerset (Jacob Rees-Mogg) made his speech—I do not think she was—she would know that article 8 of the treaty provided for penalties in relation to countries that are not eurozone members. She would also know that article 16 required the treaty to be rolled into the treaty on the functioning of the European Union within the next five years. That is the thin end of a wedge and indicates clearly to me and other members of the European Scrutiny Committee that in the current case it is possibly being contemplated that the provisions of the treaty will in due course become binding on the United Kingdom, notwithstanding the fact that the UK is not a member of the eurozone. That is the direct answer to her question.

When the Leader of the Opposition says that he would have negotiated further on the treaty, Conservative Members are entitled to ask with whom he would have negotiated. The negotiations had come to an end. Is the hon. Lady saying that the Leader of the Opposition would have negotiated with himself? The Opposition need to stop opposing just for the sake of opposition, and instead stand behind the Prime Minister and his veto and behind debates such as this. With that said, I hope that the—

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order.

I have three speakers still to call, and we have 10 minutes before the wind-ups.

Daylight Saving Bill

Debate between Stephen Phillips and Lindsay Hoyle
Friday 20th January 2012

(12 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman would have to claim to move the closure under Standing Order No. 29. I think that might be his intention.

Stephen Phillips Portrait Stephen Phillips (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con)
- Hansard - -

I beg to move, That the Question be now proposed.

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Under Standing Order No. 29, I am required to put the Question on the motion that the Question be now proposed forthwith—this Standing Order was last used in 1987—unless it shall appear to the Chair that such a motion is an abuse of the rules of the House.

Question put forthwith, That the Question now be proposed.

The House proceeded to a Division.

Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill

Debate between Stephen Phillips and Lindsay Hoyle
Monday 31st October 2011

(13 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Stephen Phillips Portrait Stephen Phillips
- Hansard - -

I am grateful, but I see Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair this evening. I am sure that if I am out of order at any stage, he will upbraid me. I do not need any lessons from the hon. Member for Hammersmith about how to speak in this Chamber or indeed about the remarks I intend to make tonight. [Interruption.] The simple fact of the matter is—[Interruption.]

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. I think Mr Slaughter needs to calm down.

--- Later in debate ---
Stephen Phillips Portrait Stephen Phillips
- Hansard - -

With the leave of the House, I was about to make my final few remarks.

Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill

Debate between Stephen Phillips and Lindsay Hoyle
Wednesday 29th June 2011

(13 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Andy Slaughter Portrait Mr Slaughter
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

You don’t even know; not a clue.

Stephen Phillips Portrait Stephen Phillips
- Hansard - -

I am grateful, Mr Deputy Speaker. I did not really want to get into the legal aid aspects of the Bill. I have expressed my concerns and I am sure that Front Benchers are listening to them. I am concerned that the Opposition have at least not spelled out any detail as to where they would make the cuts that they accept have to be made to the legal aid budget.