Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office
The Secretary of State was asked—
Illicit Finance Summit
Mr Speaker, may I associate myself entirely with your remarks about Her late Majesty?
The illicit finance summit will convene a coalition of international partners to scale up global enforcement against illicit finance. The summit will forge new partnerships to combat this shared threat, including illicit gold, money laundering in the property sector and the abuse of cryptoassets. The summit builds on our long-term commitment to this agenda, which is also shown in the 2025 UK anti-corruption strategy, and will complement our upcoming presidency of the Financial Action Task Force and other meetings.
The summit is an opportunity for global action on the dirty money that flows through our financial systems, but the Foreign Secretary might rightly be asked by our international partners why overseas territories, who fly our flag and have our King as their Head of State, are preventing transparency and accountability for billions of pounds of illicit finance. Britain should be a world leader in tackling dirty money, but we have to get our house in order. Can the Minister assure the House and our international partners that he will bring overseas territories into line, and can he outline which of his powers he will use to do so?
The hon. Member will know from my previous answers in this place how seriously I take this issue. Our commitment across the whole of our British family on these matters is very clear. I have been working closely with leaders of the overseas territories. We have seen some important progress from a number of them, but a number have not gone far enough; I have been very frank with them about that. We are working in partnership and providing technical advice and support, and I am very hopeful that we will achieve progress, particularly on legitimate interest access to beneficial registers of ownership.
Interpol: Red Notices
The UK is a strong advocate for Interpol, recognising its critical function in supporting international law enforcement co-operation. We also support its ongoing reform programme to ensure there is no space for states to wilfully misuse its systems. The UK is represented at Interpol meetings, where the adequacy of its systems are discussed, and where we work with like-minded partners to enhance safeguards against abuse.
My constituent Ollie Bennett is wanted by Interpol for an alleged crime in Morocco three decades ago. Ollie has always maintained his innocence, and following a debate in this place, his crewmate was granted a full royal pardon for the same charges. Ollie, however, was not. In December, he was arrested and detained in a French police cell. Although he is now safely home, Ollie remains at risk of arrest each and every time he goes abroad. The irony is that the Moroccan authorities have never filed to extradite Ollie, yet a Moroccan-sponsored Interpol red notice for Ollie remains active. Will the Minister commit to meeting me, to ensure that Ollie can access the support that he needs to successfully appeal this red notice and finally end this 30-year-long groundhog day?
My hon. Friend is a committed advocate for his constituents. I would be very happy to meet him. As he will know, it is a matter of long-standing policy and practice that the UK can neither confirm nor deny the existence of an Interpol alert in a public forum, to protect legitimate criminal justice inquiries, but I would be delighted to meet him.
The Government recently informed me that they have received 64 category 2 type B extradition notices under section 70 of the Extradition Act 2003, of which 56 have been certified. Fewer than five of those come from Bangladesh. Can the Minister confirm how many of those relate to Members of this House, and whether there are any Interpol red notices that apply to Members of this House?
The hon. Member will have heard the point I just made: it is a matter of long-standing policy and practice that we do not confirm Interpol notices in public.
West Bank: Illegal Settlements
Mr Speaker, may I join the tributes to Her late Majesty the Queen?
The UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs reports that over 2,500 Palestinians have been displaced by evictions, settler violence and demolitions this year alone. The UK is clear that Israeli illegal settlements and decisions designed to further them are a flagrant violation of international law. Our position is clear and unequivocal: the Israeli Government must stop the expansion of settlements, stop the threats of forcible displacement and annexation, and stop the unacceptable levels of settler violence.
Does the Foreign Secretary agree that a full ban on all forms of trade and economic activity with those illegal settlements it long overdue, so that UK businesses, the public sector and charities are prevented from having any dealings with them?
My hon. Friend will know that goods from illegal settlements are already not entitled to tariff preferences under the UK-Israel agreement, or the agreement with the Palestinian Authority. We are deeply concerned about reports of the decision to establish 34 new settlements, which would be added to the 68 settlements established since the Netanyahu Government came to office, and by the E1 settlement proposals, which are completely wrong. We will continue to work with our partners internationally to keep pressure on the Israeli Government on this issue.
Tariff preferences are one thing, and I know we cannot solve this problem alone, but we must do whatever we can to put pressure on the Israeli Government to stop. The Israeli Government are using the fog of war in Iran to make a Palestinian state unviable by an expansion of these settlements. What more do they have to do before we take action and ban settlement trade?
My hon. Friend will know that we have already introduced three packages of sanctions related to settler violence in the west bank, including measures against Cabinet members in their personal capacity, for their incitement of violence. We continue to look at the issue of sanctions. My hon. Friend is right to point out that this is fundamentally about the two-state solution, and it also risks undermining the Gaza peace process. The UK recognised the state of Palestine in September directly to support the viability of a two-state solution, and that continues to be at risk.
After the destruction of Gaza and the deaths of in excess of 72,000 Palestinians, it is evident that the Israeli Government have turned their attention not only to Lebanon and Iran, but also to the west bank. In the west bank there are now daily reports of extreme violence and death, as well as the forceful eviction of Palestinians and the continued expansion of illegal Israeli settlements. That is not only immoral, but yet further evidence of illegal Israeli Government-sponsored activity. Does the Secretary of State agree that the violence in the west bank must stop immediately, as must the continued expansion of illegal settlements? Can she assure the House that despite the continuing conflicts in Ukraine, Lebanon, Iran and Sudan, the Government are very much still focused on Gaza and the west bank?
I agree with my hon. Friend. The number of settler attacks has reached new heights, and there were more attacks in 2025 than in any year since the United Nations started recording such incidents more than 20 years ago. These attacks are horrendous, and they must stop. I have continued to raise the issue directly with the Israeli Government and our international partners. I also agree that in the end, all the work that is rightly being done to get progress and talks in Lebanon, and to find stability elsewhere in the middle east, will be badly undermined and will topple over if there is not action over the west bank.
Alongside what is happening on the west bank, in Lebanon, more than 1 million people have been forcibly displaced. The Guardian has reported that Israeli strikes on medical facilities in Nabatieh have killed health workers and ambulance crews; it notes that such incidents are becoming increasingly common. The UN is clear that the forced displacement of civilians and the targeting of civilian infrastructure may constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity under international law. What concrete measures are the UK Government putting in place to ensure that Israel ceases targeting civilian infrastructure, and stops forcible displacement in Lebanon?
The hon. Member will know that we called for the ceasefire to be extended to Lebanon, and we condemned the escalation of Israeli airstrikes. We have also strongly condemned the Hezbollah attacks on Israel, which must stop. The issue exposed clearly at the beginning of this conflict was that Hezbollah was simply being a proxy for Iran, and is not in any way the representative of the Lebanese people. That is why talks between the Lebanese Government and the Israeli Government are so important. The ceasefire is also incredibly important, but the huge displacement has devastating humanitarian consequences. That is why the UK is providing additional funding. People must be able to return safely to their homes in Lebanon.
Israel is acting illegally in supporting settlement expansion, in committing genocide in Gaza, and in attacking Lebanon and Iran. As the Secretary of State says, all those actions are flagrant violations of international law. She says that we must “put pressure” on Israel, but she is doing nothing. Time and again, she and her Ministers come to the Chamber to condemn, but take no action. When will she ban settlement trade? When will she stop all military co-operation with Israel, which is conducting these illegal attacks? When will she take action?
The UK Government have put in place a series of measures that include introducing sanctions against Cabinet members in the Israeli Government. We have taken action around sanctions and arms sales. We have been maintaining continuous international pressure, working with allies, including around the negotiations on Lebanon. We have been pressing strongly for those negotiations, including directly with the Israeli Government, the Lebanese Government and the US Government, who have hosted those talks.
While atrocities are being committed against Palestinians in the west bank every single day, including the killing of hundreds and hundreds of children, it is disgusting to learn that British citizens are being offered Palestinian land, which they can purchase with virtually the same ease with which they do their everyday online shopping. Declassified UK has found that Israeli charity Shivat Zion is helping British citizens to move to illegal settlements. That breaks international law; and, to rub salt in the wound, British taxpayers are implicated, as the charity claims UK gift aid. Will the Secretary of State assure the House that she will look into the matter urgently and sanction any organisation, charity or otherwise, complicit in Israeli illegal land grabs?
No one should be building illegal settlements on the west bank. It is essential that everyone abides by international law. We would expect any organisation in the UK and people living in the UK to abide by international law. We maintain our position that these settlements are illegal under international law.
The brutal suffering of Palestinians on the west bank remains unchallenged, and the Norwegian Refugee Council has now exposed that depraved sexual violence by Israeli soldiers and settlers is rampant against Palestinian women and girls. That is abhorrent. Will the Foreign Secretary tell us what she is doing to take a firm stand against this cruelty, and will she commit to holding Israel to account for its heinous crimes against innocent Palestinians?
My hon. Friend has raised with me the Norwegian Refugee Council report, and crimes around violence against women and girls. We have made tackling violence against women and girls, including those in conflict, a priority for the Foreign Office. We will take the matter immensely seriously. It is a crime, and the use of this violence as a weapon of war, which we have seen in conflicts across the world, is horrendous. We will continue to pursue the issue.
The Foreign Secretary has just reiterated that it is this Government’s stated objective and aim to recognise the Palestinian state, yet there are Members of the Israeli Government who say that it is their policy to expand illegal settlements in order to undermine a viable Palestinian state. Will she take firm action, ban the trade in settlement goods, and look at further sanctions on members of the Israeli Government and Members of the Knesset who promote these illegal policies?
As the hon. Lady knows, we have already introduced three packages of sanctions related specifically to the settler violence on the west bank, including sanctions against Cabinet members. She will appreciate that we do not discuss sanctions in advance, but we continue to look at the issue of sanctions, and to take immensely seriously the expansion of settlements. The decision that the UK took in the autumn to recognise the state of Palestine depends on progress with the peace process in Gaza, and on ensuring that the west bank can be a viable part of a Palestinian state.
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
My constituents have shared with me their concern that Benjamin Netanyahu’s Security Cabinet is committing international war crimes in Gaza, the west bank and Lebanon, under the cover of the war that he launched with Donald Trump. As my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) has just said, the Government were right to finally recognise the state of Palestine, yet the actions of the Israeli Government on the west bank are explicitly intended to destroy the prospect of a two-state solution. I am deeply concerned that what the Foreign Secretary has laid out today is not enough to show the Israeli Government that this Government are serious about prohibiting that. Let me ask again: will the Foreign Secretary do everything in her power to ban all settlement goods from the UK? Will she look again at measures to prohibit all UK individuals, businesses and banks from enabling illegal settlement?
We expect UK organisations, charities, businesses and individuals to abide by international law. We also expect them to recognise that the settlements on the west bank are illegal; in particular, the E1 settlement is blatantly breaking the law. We expect UK organisations to abide by the law. There are already restrictions to prevent goods from illegal settlements benefiting from tariff preferences, and we take immensely seriously engagement with those illegal settlements by UK businesses.
Iran: Human Rights
We have long been clear that the human rights situation in Iran is totally abhorrent. As I speak, the regime continues its repression, whether through executions, including of political prisoners and protesters, or through its ongoing internet blackout. January’s crackdown was an appalling reminder of this regime’s brutality. That is why we have sanctioned senior Iranian decision makers and members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps for their rights violations, and led the call for an urgent fact-finding mission at the Human Rights Council.
As was referenced, in January, the Islamic Republic unleashed hell on its own citizens, with a brutal crackdown on civilian protests that reportedly saw more than 30,000 people killed and thousands arrested. The subsequent UN Human Rights Council report found that many of Iran’s actions may amount to crimes against humanity. As these abuses continue with impunity, what steps are my hon. Friend and the Foreign Office taking to hold Iran to account and ensure that any negotiated settlement includes clear, enforceable commitments to end such atrocities?
I thank my hon. Friend for his commitment to these issues. I described our work on an Iran human rights resolution at the UN Human Rights Council, and on 12 January the Foreign Secretary spoke to her Iranian counterpart, Foreign Minister Araghchi, setting out the UK’s total abhorrence of the killings, violence and repression, and urging the Iranian authorities to change course urgently. We continue to support negotiations between the US and Iran for a lasting resolution to this conflict.
Lindsay and Craig Foreman are incarcerated in Iran in brutal circumstances, and are being tortured in many ways. They are not my constituents, but their family approached me. May I be clear to the Government, and have them be clear to us in their response? Are the Government saying publicly that they are not spies, but innocent tourists? Will they formally declare the detention to be arbitrary? What else can they do to try to draw attention to the plight of these two innocent tourists?
I have been in regular contact with the family of the Foremans. This is a terrible case, and it is absolutely obvious that they are innocent tourists—that is clear to all concerned. We have made that point repeatedly to the Iranian regime, and I have raised it countless times with Iranian representatives, as the Foreign Secretary has done with her counterparts. We will continue to pursue this case; it is an injustice.
I call the shadow Foreign Secretary.
The barbaric regime in Tehran has murdered tens of thousands of its own people. It remains the world’s foremost state sponsor of terrorism and is responsible for appalling antisemitism, and for spying on the British Jewish community. Why did the Government not stop Iran from being appointed to prominent positions in the United Nations Economic and Social Council, as the United States did? If Iran is found to be behind the disgusting attacks on Jewish sites in recent weeks in London, will the Government move forward with the proscription of the IRGC, and act against any financial institutions in the UK that are involved in funding state-sponsored terrorist activity in the UK?
As I understand it, the United Nations appointment to which the right hon. Lady refers was a decision of the Asia-Pacific committee—it was not a decision in which His Majesty’s Government had any role—and was subject to an automaticity process, rather than a vote. We did not have an option to block that appointment, although the Foreign Secretary did raise her concerns about it at the United Nations.
The right hon. Lady has rightly highlighted the malign role that Iran plays, not just domestically—as I described to my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff West (Mr Barros-Curtis)—but internationally. As has been said in this House before, Iran has continued to try to threaten communities in the UK, particularly British Jews. I have said to the Iranian ambassador here, in no uncertain terms, that if British Jews are ever found to have been harmed because of the actions of the Iranian regime, we would treat that with the utmost seriousness, as it deserves. We have sanctioned the entirety of the IRGC, we have imposed more than 550 sanctions, and we have very capable security services in this country. When the Iranians seek to act in the UK, we do find them.
Russian Federation: Financial Pressure
I recently visited Ukraine again—Lviv and Kyiv—and saw again the brutal impacts of Russia’s illegal war on the civilians and, in particular, the children of Ukraine. That is exactly why we are determined to clamp down on the individuals and companies who are supporting Russia’s war on Ukraine and the sources of revenue for that war. We have imposed over 1,200 designations against Russia, including 300 new sanctions in February. We have led international efforts to disrupt the shadow fleet, sanctioning almost 600 vessels, and collectively our efforts with other countries have denied Russia access to at least $450 billion since its full-scale invasion four years ago.
On Friday the United States agreed to extend the partial lift on sanctions on Russian oil exports. Does the Minister agree that this helps President Putin to fund his illegal and murderous war in Ukraine, and that it works directly against the national security interests of both Ukraine and the United Kingdom?
The issues to which the hon. Gentleman refers are of course for the United States. However, we are very clear that we will continue to ratchet up the economic pressure on Putin, to force him to come to the negotiating table and to provide support to Ukraine. Our sanctions remain in place, and we continue to work closely with others to increase that pressure. The Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary and I have been very clear that we cannot allow the current global situation to result in any kind of bonanza for Putin.
The verified number of Ukrainian children stolen by Russia has increased—it now stands at 20,570. In part, that increase in the verified number is the result of the tracing mechanism supported by this Government, and we hope that work will continue. However, last month a report by the Yale Humanitarian Research Laboratory found that over the past two years the Russian state oil producers Rosneft and Gazprom have been implicated in the forcible deportation and re-education of at least 2,158 of those children. Will the Secretary of State review and fully investigate those findings and, where appropriate, consider the imposition of further sanctions?
As ever, my hon. Friend is right to raise this crucial issue. I was very privileged to see for myself the incredible work that we are supporting to trace what has happened to those Ukrainian children. The figure she has cited is correct, and it is absolutely appalling. I am very proud of the work that we are doing with other countries on that issue, and I will certainly look at the issues she has raised. Of course, we have already taken action against the oil companies she mentioned.
I call the shadow Minister.
In recent months, western sanctions have really been biting Putin, with the foundations of Russia’s economy failing. However, as we highlighted with the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation in December 2025, concerns have been reported that Russian crude is reaching refineries—including one part-owned by Lakshmi Mittal—via shadow fleet vessels, showing that gaps remain. Will the Government now lead efforts to crack down on those networks and press those refineries in Turkey, China and India to stop processing Russian oil?
The right hon. Lady will know about the work we have already been doing on this crucial issue, which she is right to raise. We have been very clear on this. Under her Government, there was of course a ban on Russian liquefied natural gas imports, which we continued. We have gone further by announcing our intention to introduce a maritime services ban, and of course we will continue to co-ordinate with international partners on the issue she raises. We cannot allow those revenues to be used to fuel Russia’s terrible actions.
Gulf Conflict
I returned overnight from a series of meetings across five countries in Europe, the middle east and Asia, and I spoke directly with more than a dozen of my Foreign Minister counterparts, as well as joining the 50-country summit hosted by the Prime Minister and President Macron. This is a critical diplomatic moment. The agreed two-week ceasefire runs until Thursday, and we need it to be extended. We need the negotiations to reach a comprehensive conclusion to this conflict, and we need the reopening of the strait with no conditions and no tolls. Our work is to maintain and build the biggest possible consensus around the rapid opening of the strait.
Following reports that the Israeli military has published a map designating south Lebanese territory as a buffer zone, and given Israel’s refusal to confirm whether displaced Lebanese families will be allowed to return, can the Foreign Secretary tell the House what specific representations the UK Government have made to Israel to ensure that this does not become a de facto annexation? Does she agree that any permanent occupation of Lebanese sovereign territory would not only violate international law, but actively undermine the US-Iran talks being mediated by Pakistan?
My hon. Friend is completely right. Lebanese people need to be able to return to their homes. These are their homes, and it is a humanitarian disaster that so many people have been displaced from them. I have raised this issue directly with the Israeli Government, and we have made continued representations and raised this matter in international forums. We have also raised it with the US, which has been hosting the talks between Israel and Lebanon. It is hugely important that those talks progress, the ceasefire is maintained and Lebanese people can return home.
My constituents in Tamworth are already paying the price for the blockade of the strait of Hormuz, with fuel costs soaring. My logistics sector is also facing the brunt of those fuel costs, which ultimately will be passed on to consumers. While I welcome the Prime Minister’s refusal to drag Britain into the United States’ reckless war, what steps is the Minister taking to secure the reopening of the strait and to bring down costs for my constituents and for the United Kingdom?
My hon. Friend is right. We did not get involved in the start of this conflict, but we will work to bring it to a close and do everything we can to get the strait reopened. It is affecting the cost of living back at home in her constituency, across the country and across the world. No country should be able to hijack international shipping lanes or hold the global economy hostage. We have held repeated summits and meetings on the reopening of the strait, and we will continue to argue across the world for no tolls.
While energy giants and Wall Street banks cash in on the war, ordinary people pay the price. In the first month of the US-led war with Iran alone, the world’s 100 largest oil and gas companies made more than $30 million an hour in unearned profit. What discussions has the Minister had with the Chancellor on the merits of introducing windfall taxes to directly fund a cost of living support package, making life more affordable for people and businesses across the UK?
The Chancellor will be making a statement later this afternoon, because she has been focusing in particular on the cost of living and the importance of supporting people and businesses across the country during this global crisis. Another concern is that Russia is seeking to benefit from this conflict, which is yet another reason why we need to get the strait open as rapidly as possible.
Given President Trump’s latest threats to destroy bridges and power plants—attacks that would be against international law—has the Foreign Secretary made representations to her US counterpart that threatening war crimes is not the way to achieve peace or to open the strait? More importantly, if Trump does start to attack civilian infrastructure, will she withdraw US access to British bases?
We have been clear from the start that UK bases could be used only for defensive operations, not offensive operations. There is currently a ceasefire in place, although it runs only until Thursday and we badly need it to be extended. As part of the G7 discussions, which included the US, we raised the importance of not attacking any civilian infrastructure. That was included in the G7’s agreed communiqué and reflects the importance that we attach to those issues.
Has the Foreign Secretary made any assessment of what impact the conflict is having on the horrendous humanitarian situation in Yemen? Given Iran’s continued support for the Houthis, does she believe that in discussions to end the conflict there will be some opportunity to make a positive impact on that conflict?
I can tell the right hon. Gentleman that the Minister for the middle east, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), has met the Yemeni Prime Minister in recent days, to engage with the Yemenis, to express our support and to ensure that they can address humanitarian issues. There is obviously a particular issue with Yemen, where Iranian proxies have been mobilised in the past, and it is important that does not happen now. It is another example of how vulnerable, low-income and conflict-affected countries are the most heavily affected by the restrictions on the Gulf and the strait of Hormuz.
The Foreign Secretary’s push for consensus is to be welcomed. Hopefully, the strait of Hormuz will be open shortly, which will lead to short and medium-term progress. In the longer term, does the Foreign Secretary agree that a lasting peace in the middle east will be more easily secured if we can take action against neighbouring states and elements within those states that threaten the absolute annihilation of the state of Israel?
Israel’s security needs to be protected, and so does the security of Gulf countries that have been attacked as part of this conflict. We need security right across the region. The hon. Gentleman says that we hope the strait will soon be open. We have proposed that, as an immediate confidence-building measure, the Iranians should agree to the International Maritime Organisation’s proposal to start moving the stranded ships and the stranded seafarers. It could get on with that right now, even while negotiations are continuing. We need to get those ships moving and those seafarers home. That is what the IMO has proposed, and we have been building international support to pursue that as an immediate step.
The difficulty of ships passing through the strait is leading to fears across all sectors and supply chains, including food production, so the price of food is at risk as well as the price of oil. Increasingly offensive and bizarre social media posts by President Trump are bound to be making diplomatic efforts more difficult, and make us worry whether anything he says can be taken seriously. What steps is the Foreign Secretary taking to ensure that all parties are coming to the table in good faith?
I met Pakistan’s Foreign Minister in the last few days, and the hon. Lady will know that Pakistan is leading the mediation work as part of this effort. I have also spoken frequently to the US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, and we have been engaging with a whole series of countries. Over the last few days, I have met more than a dozen Foreign Ministers and counterparts to ensure that everyone is pressing the same messages as part of this process. We need the ceasefire extended and a swift resolution, but we must have the strait opened and we must have no tolls. Proposals for tolls have been circulating, but that would be deeply damaging and would go against the law of the sea.
I call the Chair of the International Development Committee.
Lebanon’s humanitarian flash fund secured less than a third of the money that was required. Some 20% of the Lebanese population is currently displaced, and 40,000 housing units have been destroyed. Lebanon is on the brink of economic collapse and social tensions are rising. I thank the Foreign Secretary for the humanitarian support sent to date, including cash transfers, but I ask her to do more. We need to press for a real ceasefire, provide practical support to Lebanon’s armed forces, help the state to tackle negative influences that are trying to undermine its sovereignty and, finally, vigorously oppose the illegal expansion of Israel’s buffer zone in south Lebanon.
I can tell my hon. Friend that the Minister for the middle east, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), was in Beirut at the end of last week, where he pressed those exact points and engaged with the Lebanese Prime Minister. We need an urgent ceasefire, and we need to support the work of the Lebanese armed forces and the Lebanese Government. That is why we have directly provided £30 million of humanitarian support for Lebanon since the beginning of this crisis. I believe that makes us one of the biggest donors to Lebanon, but we must continue to provide support.
A huge proportion of the global fertiliser market works its way through the strait, which is obviously going to impact on food security and food prices in this country, but it could also cause devastating famines in many countries in Africa and Asia. Research from the University of Minnesota shows that 762,000 people have died as a direct result of US aid cuts since January last year, and some will undoubtedly have died because of our decision to cut our aid budget too. Is this the moment to do the right thing by increasing our spending on international aid and protecting people from the calamity of famine?
The hon. Member will know from our statement that we have focused our support on fragile and conflict-affected states. We are also working, including with the World Bank, to monitor the states most heavily affected by shortages of fertiliser, and of food and oil supplies, which are having a huge impact.
I just want to correct the point I made about the additional funding we have provided for Lebanon being £30 million from the beginning of the crisis. As I understand it, the figure is £30 million since the beginning of this year and £20 million since the beginning of the crisis. However, Lebanon is one of the countries we have ensured we are protecting by continuing to invest and by providing humanitarian support.
UK-Mauritius Treaty
As I have said many times in this House, Diego Garcia is a key strategic military asset for the United Kingdom, the United States and our allies, and ensuring its long-term operational security is and will continue to be our priority. We remain confident that the UK-Mauritius treaty is the best way to defend the future of the base. We are obviously disappointed with the delay, which I set out the other day, but we will continue to work with the United States and Mauritius on the way forward.
The Chagos islands are even further from my constituency than they are from Mauritius, which is saying something, but this is having a significant local impact. Hillingdon council is now caring for hundreds of Chagossians fleeing to this country through Heathrow airport to escape the consequences of the Government’s proposed deal, which is placing huge financial pressure on my local authority. Will the Minister undertake to cancel this proposed UK-Mauritius treaty, to bring certainty about the future of the base and ensure that my constituents do not continue to bear the consequences of those forced to flee by the Government’s actions?
I have a lot of respect for the hon. Gentleman, but I simply disagree with the premise of what he says. Chagossians who have been coming to this country have come because of agreements made under the previous Government for them to acquire British citizenship, which entitles them to come here. Support has been provided to councils, and I have worked closely with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government on this issue. If he has any further concerns or requests to make sure, he should do that through the usual channels.
I call the shadow Minister.
Last week, this feeble Government limped to this House to announce that their shameful Chagos surrender Bill was being ditched—a diplomatic failure entirely owned by this Labour Government. Our friends and allies alike around the world were left bemused by the deal that this Government came up with. This week, the Government have sent a team of officials to Mauritius. Can the Minister make it clear that that team have been told unequivocally to tell the Mauritius Government that the deal is dead, the UK will be sending no money to the Mauritius Government and the Chagos islands will be remaining British?
With the exception of when I broke my ankle before Christmas, I have never limped to this House on any occasion. I came here with confidence to set out the reasons why this treaty was needed for our national security. Our officials engage regularly not only with Mauritius, but with the United States and other partners. This deal was of course welcomed by our allies, including our Five Eyes partners, so I simply do not accept what the shadow Minister has said.
Gibraltar: UK-EU Treaty
Yesterday I appeared before the Foreign Affairs Committee—its Chair, my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry), is in the House—after the Chief Minister of Gibraltar, to set out this process and to engage in the very important scrutiny that the House provides on this matter. We are all committed to fully implementing and ratifying the treaty as soon as possible to realise its benefits for the people of Gibraltar. There is obviously a complex process, but my understanding is that provisional application of the treaty will be possible from 15 July, which will secure the key benefits of the treaty for the people of Gibraltar, including the fluid border, allowing businesses and working people more certainty and prosperity.
I ask the House to note my relatively recent visit to Gibraltar, which is declared in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests.
The naval base in Gibraltar is of high strategic importance and the decision to allow the Spanish authorities to monitor equipment going to the British military is highly concerning. Will the Minister guarantee that the treaty will neither directly nor indirectly in any way limit the operations, access or security of the UK naval base?
I can absolutely assure the hon. Gentleman of that. We would not have signed off the deal without those assurances. The Ministry of Defence, the Defence Secretary and others were fully involved at all stages of the process. We have been very clear that the treaty protects the operational autonomy of our military facilities, which will continue to operate unfettered, as they do today.
I congratulate the Government on this significant announcement. Does the Minister agree with me that the agreement provides additional safeguards to Gibraltar’s sovereignty, while creating new economic opportunities for its people? Does he agree that anyone in this House who has any concerns should listen to the Chief Minister of Gibraltar, who knows better than anyone what is best for the people who elected him and he represents?
I can assure my hon. Friend of that. It is important to note that Gibraltar’s sovereignty was never on the table in the negotiations—we have been very clear about that throughout. The agreement has been supported by and worked through with the Government of Gibraltar throughout, and it was unanimously supported by Gibraltar’s Parliament. That is very important to note in this House.
I call the shadow Minister.
The Minister made a statement to the House on 26 February. Sadly, that has not been followed by the detail that Parliament was promised. In his most recent answers to my written parliamentary questions he says that the final treaty will be laid “As soon as possible” after EU processes conclude, yet the Government of Gibraltar have stated that it is provisionally due to come into force in July. Will the Minister set out a clear timetable for implementation and confirm when Parliament will be given proper time to scrutinise the full details? Will he guarantee that scrutiny under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act process will take place before provisional application?
As I set out yesterday, the timetable is not entirely in our control, because it relates to the other party in the treaty, the EU, and its processes. Mr Speaker, you will know that I brought forward the entire text of the draft treaty so that this House had a chance to scrutinise it. I have also provided briefings to the right hon. Lady and her colleague, the right hon. Member for Witham (Priti Patel), as I did yesterday in the Foreign Affairs Committee. We will follow the CRaG process in the usual way. I will ensure that the House is kept fully informed and is able to scrutinise as appropriate.
Topical Questions
Yesterday, the Prime Minister updated the House on the fact that UK Security Vetting recommended against granting vetting of Peter Mandelson, and that the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office instead took the decision to grant the vetting. The Prime Minister, the former Foreign Secretary and I should have been told that there was an issue and I am very troubled that we were not. The result is that Parliament was not given all the information it should have been given. As I informed the Select Committee over the weekend, I have commissioned a review of all the information provided and I will write to the Chair further on that shortly.
The permanent under-secretary is no longer in post, and I want to recognise Sir Olly Robbins’ many years of dedicated public service, as the Prime Minister did yesterday. I also want to pay tribute to the FCDO and the incredible staff who work not just here in the UK but across the world promoting UK interests and values at an incredibly unstable time. That is what has made it possible for me to travel through five different countries in the past six days, pursuing international diplomacy. The scale of global insecurity impacting our economy and our national security will rightly continue to be the central focus of the FCDO and this ministerial team.
As the conflict in the middle east has fundamentally demonstrated, modern warfare has evolved. Ballistic and hypersonic missiles are capable of overwhelming traditional air defence systems, and energy supplies, food security and critical goods are increasingly weaponised as instruments of coercion. Will the Foreign Secretary set out what specific steps the Foreign Office is taking, in co-ordination with the Ministry of Defence, to ensure that the United Kingdom is prepared for those threats, to protect our people and our country?
My hon. Friend is right to highlight the changing technology, geopolitics and security threats. We now face very different threats to our country. That is why we are increasing both the defence budget and the Foreign Office’s work around a range of hybrid threats, including cyber and others, and we will need to continue to do so. I suspect that we will need to accelerate that work, too.
I call the shadow Foreign Secretary.
This morning, we heard Sir Olly Robbins say that there was a “dismissive attitude” and an atmosphere of pressure from No. 10 towards security vetting due to its desire to get Mandelson in post as soon as possible. Given Sir Olly’s account, why did the Foreign Secretary lose confidence in him last week? Surely the Prime Minister passed the buck for his own failures and appalling judgment.
The starting point was the appointment of Peter Mandelson; he should never have been appointed to his post. The Prime Minister made that clear, and has apologised not just to the House but, more importantly, to the victims of Epstein, which is where that apology should lie. The right hon. Lady will know that Ministers have a responsibility to provide accurate information to the House and to ensure that we get that information from officials. Ministers, including the former Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister, should have been told about the UK Security Vetting conclusions and recommendation, which I think was relevant information that should have been provided to the House in September.
Like the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary will be aware that Peter Mandelson was on the board of Sistema alongside Russian spies. Has she now checked whether the concerns raised during vetting related to Mandelson’s business links with enemies of the United Kingdom, including Russia and China? Has she asked for the details of the mitigations Sir Olly mentioned this morning and whether they were put in place around Mandelson? Does she know what kompromat our enemies have on him, and is she reviewing all his activities as ambassador for any compromise of UK national security?
I have been informed of the conclusions of the UK Security Vetting report and assessment and its recommendation; I have not seen the detailed content of its report. I do think there is a distinction between the individual personal information that is provided and the conclusion and recommendations UKSV provides. The right hon. Lady will know that the Prime Minister has instigated a full investigation by Sir Adrian Fulford into this entire process and what was known, as well as the whole vetting process. Information is also being provided to the Intelligence and Security Committee.
I know of my hon. Friend’s commitment to these issues and of the concern in Burnley. I raised exactly those concerns about the west bank with counterparts from the United States—with high representatives from the board of peace—and most importantly with the Palestinian Prime Minister, who is doing everything he can to ensure that people on the west bank are protected from settlement violence. Settlements have expanded at an historic rate and are a subject of deep controversy both in Israel and in this House. We will continue to raise these issues with the seriousness that they deserve.
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
This morning the Foreign Affairs Committee learned that officials in No. 10 put pressure on the FCDO to find a job as ambassador for Matthew Doyle, a close friend of a convicted sex offender. Does the Foreign Secretary see a pattern here? Does she find it incredible that No. 10 told FCDO officials not to tell her predecessor about this proposal? Will she commit to investigating and publishing all records held by the FCDO about this proposal from No. 10? Is she concerned that political decisions by No. 10 about FCDO staffing have grossly eroded trust and morale among her hard-working civil servants?
Obviously, I was the Home Secretary at the time that I understand that took place, so I was not involved and do not know the circumstances. I am, of course, extremely concerned at any suggestion that the permanent secretary or permanent under-secretary of the Foreign Office would be told not to inform the Foreign Secretary. As for the case that the hon. Member raised, I can confirm that it would also not have been an appropriate appointment.
Let me respond to the wider issue. As I said in my opening statement, I pay tribute to the phenomenal dedication of the people who work right across the Foreign Office. They work with me every single day at a time of immense global instability, and they are continuing to work with huge dedication on pursuing UK interests and UK values, because that is what makes us stronger at home.
I am glad that my hon. Friend raises this issue. In Berlin last week with my German, French, US, EU and African Union co-hosts, we called for an urgent ceasefire, a humanitarian truce and humanitarian access. It is deeply distressing that this conflict is continuing. Participants also pledged over £1 billion to support the humanitarian response, which includes £146 million of UK humanitarian funding this year for Sudan and an increase in the support given to local aid groups. However, it is desperately urgent that we get a ceasefire, because it is the worst humanitarian crisis of the 21st century.
As the Prime Minister set out yesterday, we believe that Ministers should have been informed that the UK Security Vetting recommendation was against granting developed vetting to Peter Mandelson. That is significant and important information. It should have been disclosed to the Prime Minister at the time, and it should certainly have been disclosed to me at the time when I was answering specific questions from the Select Committee that were particularly about security concerns and what the response had been to them. Again, as the Prime Minister has said, he spoke to Sir Olly before making the decision.
The most immediate, urgent thing we need to do internationally is get the strait of Hormuz reopened. That is what I have been pursuing in a series of diplomatic meetings over the last few days across five different countries with 12 different Foreign Ministers. On the domestic issue, the Chancellor will be making a statement shortly.
I want to reassure this House that the Government have not taken our eye off events in Lebanon or indeed in Israel and Palestine. That is why I was in Beirut last week with the Lebanese Prime Minister, President and various others and in Brussels yesterday with the Palestinian Prime Minister and a range of other key actors. Clearly, what the European Union does is a matter for itself. We have taken a series of steps in the way that the Foreign Secretary has already set out, and we will keep those under close review.
In my constituency, I recently met a young woman from Somaliland who in recent years has lost 14 members of her family to fighting in the region. She and other campaigners from Somaliland are understandably reticent to use the new e-visa system introduced by the Somalian Government due to fears about privacy and data protection. Will the Minister raise those questions with his counterparts in the Somalian Government to ensure that Somalilanders can travel to their country without fear?
I thank my hon. Friend for her question and offer my condolences to her young constituent. The British embassy in Mogadishu has raised e-visas with the Federal Government of Somalia. We will provide further updates to travel advice in due course, as necessary. We continue to raise these issues and call for peaceful talks to bring about a sustainable peace in Somalia.
We discussed this issue directly at the Berlin conference. I agree with the hon. Member. To be honest, I think that the international community has failed the people of Sudan. The war continues in the most horrendous circumstances. We have urged anyone who can to put pressure on the RSF and the SAF, and they must allow humanitarian access to people who desperately need it.
Businesses in my constituency including trailer manufacturer Indespension are labouring under a mountain of repetitive, costly and unnecessary paperwork because the last Government failed to negotiate a regime for mutual recognition of conformity assessments. What progress has the Foreign Secretary made, with the Paymaster General, in removing the Brexit barriers to trade that are holding back British businesses abroad?
My hon. Friend raises an important question on behalf of his constituents. Our long-term national interest, and indeed the interest of businesses in his constituency, requires a closer EU partnership anchored in common understanding. We are tackling trade barriers, and we are working hard on these issues with the Paymaster General. We continue to discuss the challenges faced by manufacturers on both sides, as well as trade and co-operation agreement implementation, at the trade specialised committees. We will have a chance to discuss many of these issues at the further summit that we will have later this year.
As the hon. Member may know, I have repeatedly summoned the Iranian ambassador on concerns about what goes on in the UK. Some elements of the alleged attacks in the UK are still sub judice, but I want to leave him in no doubt about how forcefully we have raised these points with the Iranian ambassador, and indeed with the Iranian regime.
Constituents involved in my local Rotary club have contacted me about the global polio eradication programme. I am reliably advised that Ministers want to concentrate resources for the best impact. Can the Minister reassure my constituents that the UK remains determined to protect the important gains made in polio eradication for the future?
I can offer my hon. Friend that reassurance, and I pay tribute to Rotarians who have worked for the eradication of polio over so many decades. We will continue to support global polio eradication directly until December 2026 and then support our polio eradication fund through £248 million of fully flexible core funding to the World Health Organisation between 2025 and 2028. We remain utterly committed to eradicating polio around the world.
Last month, the Rycroft review confirmed that the UK faces persistent and strategic interference from hostile states and warned that our defences against information warfare are “worryingly weak”. With important elections across the country in two weeks’ time, including in my Stockport council area, what steps are the Government taking, working with our allies, to prevent disinformation from overseas aimed at those participating in UK elections?
The hon. Lady raises a crucial issue, and I work closely with the Security Minister and others on these matters. Our electoral system is highly resilient and to date we have not seen evidence of successful Russian interference in UK democratic processes. However, we know that the Kremlin is seeking to sow discord in the west and in the UK and to undermine our institutions. We are working on a series of measures to ensure that it cannot achieve that foothold in our society or our democracy.
On 1 January, Israel revoked the licences of 37 international non-governmental organisations working in the occupied west bank and Gaza. The United Nations human rights chief called the suspensions “outrageous” and said that they made
“an already intolerable situation even worse for the people of Gaza”.
What is the Minister doing to ensure that the Israeli Government allow lifesaving aid to enter Gaza, reverse the suspensions of the licences and do not politicise or weaponise aid and humanitarian relief?
We have continued to raise the importance of all the necessary aid getting into Gaza. It is welcome that over the last week the amount of aid that has gone in has increased, but it is still not adequate to the needs. We have raised the question of restrictions directly and repeatedly with the Israeli Government and we will continue to do so. It is vital that aid gets to the people who need it.
Would the UK consider a state to be a democracy and would it continue normal diplomatic relations with that state were it to introduce a differential death penalty based on ethnicity?
I think the hon. Member refers to the legislation passed in the Israeli Knesset. We oppose the death penalty everywhere. On 29 March, we joined many of our friends across the world to condemn that specific measure, and the Foreign Secretary has raised it specifically with the Israeli Foreign Minister. I can leave the House in no doubt about our opposition to the measures.
I call the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee.
May I associate myself with the comments of the Foreign Secretary with regard to the Foreign Office and the dedication and hard work of its officials? At a time like this, we are particularly in need of a Foreign Office that is absolutely at the top of its game, not just in this country but across the world. However, the Foreign Affairs Committee’s concerns remain about security more than anything else, and the impact of employing Peter Mandelson causes us great concern. During his time as the ambassador to the United States, he was given access to top secret information. How can we protect our country against his leaking any of that, given his record?
I know that my right hon. Friend has been taking evidence on that issue and that she has raised issues around security. We take the issue of security extremely seriously. She will know that there is a police investigation under way, which raises some of those issues. She will appreciate that I do not want to say anything that would cut across that, but I am happy to discuss the matter with her further.
I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. Point 13 of the first phase of the Gaza peace plan negotiated by the United States is very clear that Hamas must disarm, dismantle their terrorist infrastructure and play no role in Gaza’s future. The Government have expressed support for that and they are right to do so, yet Hamas have been equally clear that they are not going to disarm, and every indication is that they are doing the reverse. What steps will the Government take to ensure that the removal of Hamas and the demilitarisation of Gaza become a reality?
I was discussing precisely these issues yesterday. Hamas must disarm; there must be a process by which their weapons are decommissioned. There are ongoing discussions on those questions. Hamas must agree, voluntarily, to disarm. That is vital and it is a key component of the 20-point plan. Without agreement on that point, it will be difficult to make progress. I was discussing that with a range of our international counterparts yesterday and we will continue to remain very focused.
Mr Speaker, may I take the opportunity quickly to correct—
Order. You may do it at the end of Question Time.
On Sudan and the failing international response, will the Foreign Secretary consider further economic measures and sanctions, including against the nationals of the countries that support the belligerents? Will she encourage the Prime Minister to prioritise Sudan in his international engagements so he can show the leadership that she has shown?
I can assure my right hon. Friend that we are continuing to raise matter this as well. We assess that around a dozen countries are providing different kinds of arms flow support to the warring parties. That is an extremely serious concern and we are raising it with a range of countries. We also continue to look at the issue of sanctions.
Following the Minister’s answer to Question 1 on illicit finances, we still do not have publicly accessible registers of beneficial ownership in the overseas territories, nearly 10 years after this House passed the necessary legislation and made it clear that they must be set up. When will the Government put their foot down, say that there has been enough delay and obfuscation, and fully open up these registers to proper scrutiny now?
The right hon. Gentleman will know that we have publicly accessible registers in some of the overseas territories—in Gibraltar and Montserrat—and there has been welcome progress on legitimate interest access registers in a number of them, including in recent weeks, but I absolutely agree that we need to go much further. We are working closely to ensure that there is progress, and I have set out my expectations very clearly.
I have always been assured by both the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary that the case of my constituent, Jagtar Singh Johal, who has been arbitrarily detained in India for eight and a half years, would continue to be raised at all levels, but I understand that the Foreign Secretary met her counterpart Jaishankar on two occasions recently and was unable to do so. Can I have the Foreign Secretary’s assurance that she remains committed to raising Jagtar’s case and is actively working to secure his release?
I can give my hon. Friend the assurance that we continue to raise the important case of Jagtar Singh Johal and to seek a resolution to his case as soon as we can.
Last month, the United Nations General Assembly voted to demand that countries including the United Kingdom pay reparations for slavery. Astonishingly, the Foreign Secretary instructed our ambassador to abstain and to issue a pathetic hand-wringing statement that failed to mention the United Kingdom’s unique role in the eradication of this great evil. Are we a punchbag or are we a great, proud country? Will the Foreign Secretary explain her decision and state to the House unequivocally that the United Kingdom will never pay a penny of British taxpayers’ money in reparations?
We are, of course, against reparations, and when the right hon. Gentleman was a member of the Conservative party, I think he was against them, but who knows what he is for or against now? Goodness only knows. Let’s face it, Mr Speaker, he has just got his clip for social media, and this is all the response that he deserves.
March was one of the deadliest months on record for settler violence in the occupied west bank. For communities such as Jayyous, life is becoming intolerable. Will the Government go further than the diplomatic pressure currently being exerted and expand sanctions on the many Israeli officials explicitly and brazenly empowering settler violence against Palestinians in the west bank?
I thank my hon. Friend for raising that important point. As I said earlier, it remains uppermost in our minds, and we discussed it with our partners yesterday. He will have heard Ministers say before from this Dispatch Box that we will not speculate on further sanctions, but we treat this issue with the seriousness it deserves.
The Foreign Secretary has made it clear that a ceasefire in Sudan is a key priority. In the light of the Berlin conference’s shortcomings, can she detail the diplomatic, economic and political levers she is using to bring an end to the violence, particularly with the UK’s allies, including the UAE, with direct stakes in the war?
I can tell the hon. Member that as well as discussing this matter intensively at the Berlin conference, I discussed it with the UAE Foreign Minister, whom I met a couple of days ago. I also discussed it with the other members of the Quad—the US, Saudi and Egypt. We are continuing to work not just with the Quad but much more widely to engage all countries in pressure to get to a ceasefire.
Can the Foreign Secretary give a guarantee that there is nothing in the so-called reset negotiations with the European Union or the rumoured reset Bill that is incompatible with section 38 of the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020?
The Minister for the Cabinet Office has set out answers to those questions.
Does the Foreign Secretary accept that, as a matter of objective fact, this House was misled about the circumstances of Mandelson’s security vetting, even if that misleading was inadvertent?
The House was not given the full information. It is important that it should be given the full information, and I have undertaken to write to the Select Committee ensuring that full, as well as accurate, information is provided.
In the UK, we pride ourselves on allowing people to practise their religion freely. Can the Minister update the House on what he is doing with any new regime in Iran to protect the rights of Christians to worship openly there?
Freedom of religious belief continues to be an important issue that the Foreign Office pursues with vigour. I am glad that we are joined in the Chamber by our envoy on that question, my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland (David Smith). We have raised questions of freedom of religious belief with the Iranian Government on countless occasions. It is clear, given the scale of restrictions that they have put on their own people, that they are not listening to the United Kingdom’s advocacy on these questions, but we will continue to raise these questions and pursue the matter with our partners.
That completes oral questions.
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I wish to correct the answer I gave the shadow Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for Witham (Priti Patel), in relation to the Iranian appointment. While it is true that our diplomats have raised concerns about human rights issues in general, the Foreign Secretary has not herself raised within the United Nations the question of this appointment. There has been no opportunity for her to do so.