Campaign response: Campaigns relating to recent events in Israel - May 2021
Thank you to constituents for writing to me regarding their concerns over recent events in Israel.
I have received a large number of emails on this subject and as one of the world's most controversial ongoing conflicts I fully understand the strength of feeling clearly demonstrated by constituents in their communications with me.
I have joined other parliamentarians in calling for a de-escalation and an end to this conflict as soon as possible. The UK Government has been at the forefront of efforts to call for a ceasefire and peace talks through both bilateral and multilateral channels. The Foreign Secretary has spoken in recent days with the Israeli Foreign Minister and the Palestinian Prime Minister; he reinforced the UK’s clear message of de-escalation and our desire to work together to end the violence. Similar messages were delivered to the Israeli ambassador and the Palestinian head of mission in London.
A ceasefire has now been agreed. Clearly the conflict which lasted 10+ days has taken its toll and I regret the lives that have been lost on both sides. Though I suspect, as with previous conflicts involving Hamas, talks of peace and a return to the status quo will prove to be futile due to the well-known ultimate aim of Hamas to destroy Israel, in the short term I wish to see this ceasefire bringing about a temporary relief from conflict and peace in Israel and to its people.
I sincerely hope the Palestinian Authority will now recognise the need to reconsider their position and finally end unprovoked attacks on Israel. But this looks unlikely as Palestinian leadership seems ever so determined to continue with their violent assault on Israel and its people, with President Abbas’s Fatah party has called for a ‘day of rage’ in the West Bank in recent days, after which violent altercations were reported in Jerusalem and Ramallah.
The scale of the damage done to Israel has been substantial, notwithstanding the damage the Palestinian leadership has done to its own people: According to latest figures released on 18 May, over 3,500 rockets have been fired towards Israel by the Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad terror groups in the Gaza Strip. Hundreds of these rockets have targeted major Israeli cities 30+ miles away from Gaza, with some rockets travelling as far as 150 miles to Israel’s Eilat Red Sea resort city. Israel’s Iron Dome Missile defence system has intercepted around 90% of the rockets projected to hit civilian areas.
Meanwhile, approximately 460 rockets have fallen short and exploded in Gaza harming Palestinian civilians – one in seven of the total number of rockets fired, with Palestinian NGO Defense for Children confirming on Monday 10th May that eight Palestinians, including two children, were killed by a “homemade rocket” fired from Gaza which that “fell short”. The Palestinians instigating these attacks must now stop firing any more rocket to prevent further harm done to all concerned in this conflict.
Many have tried to vilify Israel and criticise its record on Gaza and the West Bank. However what I would say to them is that in the midst of the conflict, as rockets were landing on Israeli soil and killing its civilians, Israel facilitated convoys carrying medical supplies, including field hospitals, COVID-19 vaccines and food products to Gaza via the reopened crossings.
Furthermore, I am deeply troubled by the heightened level of violent and anti-Semitic rhetoric coming from the Palestinian side. For instance, a Hamas official used his Twitter platform to call on fellow Palestinians to “buy a knife for 5 shekels” to “cut off the heads of the Jews”. This and many other social media posts that clearly call for Jews to be killed have since been removed or deleted, but they should never been posted in the first place.
Regrettably this kind of dangerous rhetoric has since found its way to the UK. In Chigwell, Rabbi Rafi Goodwin was hospitalised after being attacked outside his synagogue. In London, activists drove through Golders Green and Finchley, both areas with large Jewish populations, apparently shouting antisemitic abuse through a megaphone. These are intimidatory, racist and extremely serious crimes. There can be absolutely no excuse for this type of appalling behaviour and the police have since made a number of arrests for racially aggravated public order offences, and have had to place extra patrols in certain areas to maintain law and order.
What is clear, above all, is that the need for a renewed peace process is more urgent than ever. The UK Government remains committed to a two-state solution through direct negotiations, and all parties involved as well as the international community must step up efforts without delay.
I am proud to be a supporter of the state of Israel and a friend of the Palestinian people. I look forward to the day when the Palestinians can enjoy the security of a sovereign state upon the successful conclusion of a negotiated two-state solution. This will require difficult compromises from the leaders of both parties, but it remains achievable.
However, I continued to have serious concerns over Hamas’ preference for the destruction of Israel over the wellbeing of the people of Gaza, and no doubt you share my view that until Hamas seeks peace instead of terror, there sadly can be no progress towards a peaceful resolution with Israel.
Thank you again for taking the time to write to me.
Campaign response: Defend Israel - May 2021
Concerned constituents have been writing to me about over recent events unfolding in Israel.
They are right to point out that these latest acts of violence against Israel and its people are being orchestrated by Hamas – an organisation which publicly declares the ‘destruction of the state of Israel’ as its primarily aim and has rightly been recognised as a terrorist organisation by the UK and many of our allies.
As a proud member of the Conservative Friends of Israel, I took part in a Zoom call organised by CFI where I and other pro-Israel parliamentarians were briefed by senior personnel of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF). I was pleased to learn from them that the response from the IDF in the face of Hamas aggression has been decisive and effective.
The Israeli Air Force have conducted hundreds of airstrikes against Hamas-linked facilities in Gaza. 30 Palestinians have been reportedly killed, including the head of Islamic Jihad’s special rocket unit, Sameh Abed al-Mamluk, and the head of the Hamas anti-tank missile unit. Israeli’s Iron Dome missile defence system has intercepted thousands of rockets and continues to work in full swing to protect Israeli lives. In response to provocations on the Temple Mount, Israeli riot police have been deployed, equipped with tear gas, stun grenades and rubber-coated bullets to contain the unrest.
I fully condemn the firing of rockets at Jerusalem and other locations in Israel, and I stand with the state of Israel and its people and will continue to defend Israel’s fully legitimate right to self-defence and to defend its own citizens from attack.
Hamas and other terrorist organisations that are instigating these attacks have been warned; these acts of terrorism will not go unnoticed by Israel.
The UK Government has today issued a statement strongly condemning these acts of terrorism from Hamas and other terrorist groups, and have urged them to immediately and permanently end their incitement and rocket fire against Israel.
I fully condemn the irresponsible actions of Hamas and the Palestinian leadership and if given the opportunity will not hesitate to call on them in the strongest of terms to cease and desist with their unwarranted and unjustified acts of aggression on Israel.
Campaign response: Stop Sheikh Jarrah Evictions
Constituents have written to me regarding recent events in East Jerusalem and in particular, the dispute over Sheikh Jarrah.
They are right to point out that the UK Government opposes Israeli settlements built on occupied land and considers them as an obstacle to peace. The Prime Minister has consistently made it clear, as a vocal friend of the state of Israel, that he opposes annexation of the West Bank.
The UK Government and its representatives are in regular contact with all parties involved to make clear our concerns about the evictions of Palestinians from their homes in East Jerusalem to the Israeli authorities and the Municipality of Jerusalem. The Fourth Geneva Convention, which applies to all occupied territories, including East Jerusalem, prohibits demolitions or forced evictions absent military necessity.
On the 6th of May, the governments of France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom have issued the following joint statement on Israeli settlements, calling for both sides to enter into dialogue and a peaceful resolution to be found:
“We urge the Government of Israel to reverse its decision to advance the construction of 540 settlement units in the Har Homa E area of the occupied West Bank, and to cease its policy of settlement expansion across the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Settlements are illegal under international law, and threaten prospects for a peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
If implemented, the decision to advance settlements in Har Homa, between East Jerusalem and Bethlehem, will cause further damage to the prospects for a viable Palestinian State, with Jerusalem as the capital of both Israel and a Palestinian State. This move, alongside settlement advancement in Givat HaMatos and continued evictions in East Jerusalem, including in Sheikh Jarrah, also undermines efforts to rebuild trust between the parties, following the positive resumption of Israeli-Palestinian cooperation.
We call on both sides to refrain from any unilateral action and resume a credible and meaningful dialogue, to advance efforts for the two state solution and an end to the conflict.”
I share the UK government’s position in response to recent events and will continue to fully support calls for peaceful dialogue to resume.
However I cannot support a call for sanctions to be imposed on Israel. Any form of trade embargo on Israel and the wider boycott campaign stand to be damaging for UK-Israel bilateral relations, and counterproductive to the peace process.
As a supporter of the State of Israel, I celebrate the UK’s record trade ties and flourishing partnership in medicine, technology and academia with the country. I may not always be in agreement with the actions of its government, but that does not detract from the fact that Israel is the only true democracy in the region and a strong bilateral partner to the UK.
At the same time, I am proud to be a friend of the Palestinian people. I look forward to the day when Palestinians can enjoy the security of a sovereign state upon the successful conclusion of a negotiated two-state solution. This will require difficult compromises from the leaders of both parties, but it remains achievable.
What is clear, above all, is that the need for a renewed peace process is more urgent than ever. I welcome the landmark normalisation agreements between Israel and her Arab partners, the Abraham Accords, which renews hopes for peace. I am committed to support the UK Government’s efforts to a two-state solution through direct negotiations, and all parties involved as well as the international community must step up efforts without delay.
I hope the above adequately sets out my position.
Campaign response: Ban Trade with Illegal Israeli Settlements - April 2021
Recently constituents have emailed me about Israeli settlements and the potential of a ban on settlement trade with Israel.
They are right to point out that the UK government opposes Israeli settlements built on occupied land and considers them as an obstacle to peace. The Prime Minister has consistently made it clear, as a vocal friend of the state of Israel, that he opposes annexation of the West Bank.
They will no doubt also be aware that the UK government has a long-standing position to oppose the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement towards the state of Israel – but more important towards all democratic countries that are considered to be allies of the UK, which includes Israel.
The Israeli occupation of the West Bank has continued for over 50 years not because Israel wants to rule over the territory but because peace talks – in which Israel seeks recognition and security guarantees in return for the creation of Palestinian state in the Gaza Strip and West Bank with agreed land swaps – have failed thus far.
While I share the UK government’s position that settlement expansion is counter-productive to the peace process, they should not be considered a permanent obstacle to peace. Not only does Israel have a history of removing settlements in the interests of peace, but both parties have accepted for decades, as per previous interim peace agreements, that a final two-state solution would include Israel retaining settlements in exchange for equivalent land swaps.
On their suggestion of a ban on settlement trade with Israel, any form of trade embargo on Israel and the wider boycott campaign stand to be damaging for UK-Israel bilateral relations, and counterproductive to the peace process.
I will continue to support efforts to restart direct peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, in order to achieve a lasting and viable two-state solution. These talks are absolutely necessary in order to address the crucial final-status issues of borders, the status of Jerusalem, Israel’s security concerns, settlements, and Palestinian sovereignty.
As a supporter of the State of Israel, I celebrate the UK’s record trade ties and flourishing partnership in medicine, technology and academia with the country. I may not always be in agreement with the actions of its government, but that does not detract from the fact that Israel is the only true democracy in the region and a strong bilateral partner to the UK.
At the same time, I am proud to be a friend of the Palestinian people. I look forward to the day when Palestinians can enjoy the security of a sovereign state upon the successful conclusion of a negotiated two-state solution. This will require difficult compromises from the leaders of both parties, but it remains achievable.
What is clear, above all, is that the need for a renewed peace process is more urgent than ever. I welcome the landmark normalisation agreements between Israel and her Arab partners, the Abraham Accords, which renews hopes for peace. The UK Government remains committed to a two-state solution through direct negotiations, and all parties involved as well as the international community must step up efforts without delay.
I hope the above adequately sets out my position on the matter.
Campaign response: Cutting aid to Syria will cost lives - April 2021
A number of constituents have been in touch regarding the future of UK Aid and the assistance we have been providing to the people of Syria since the conflict began 10 years ago are topics.
They will know that I am a champion of our overseas aid. UK Aid goes towards vaccinating children from preventable diseases, enabling them to go to school and helping people work their way out of poverty, as well as providing vital food, nutrition and medical care in conflict zones such as Syria.
Our aid also provides added value to our security and trade policies. Foreign development assistance can often make an important contribution towards in supporting stability and sustainable development for the recipient country, leading to better foreign relations and prospect for a more preferential trade deal with them.
It is in our interest to maintain our foreign aid policy because it also helps to promote UK interests abroad and ensure our position as the world’s leading soft power nation is secure.
As the brutal conflict in Syria enters its second decade, millions of people continue to be in need. It is estimated that over 500,000 people have been killed in the conflict between the Assad regime, extremist groups and moderate opposition.
In response to the decade-long crisis, the UK has spent over £3.5 billion between February 2012 and December 2020. This includes FCDO allocations to over 30 implementing partners (including United Nations agencies, international non-governmental organisations and the Red Cross) and is helping to meet the immediate needs of vulnerable people in Syria and of refugees in the region, while also providing support to refugee-hosting countries. Our support has reached millions of people and has saved lives in Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, Iraq and Egypt.
To date, the UK’s generous and compassionate response in Syria and the region has aided the delivery of:
- 28 million monthly food rations (23 million in Syria)
- 14 million vaccines (9.8 million in Syria)
- 21 million medical consultations (18 million in Syria)
- 10 million relief packages (9.9 million in Syria)
While I share the disappointment of many in the Government’s announcement that we will be reducing our contribution to aid in Syria to at least £205 million in the coming year, I also understand that these are incredibly challenging times for the nation and it is important that our public finances are managed in such a way that will maximise the effectiveness of our response to Covid-19.
At a time when we need to prioritise jobs and public services, sticking rigidly to spending pre-pandemic levels of overseas aid is difficult to justify to the British people.
But this should never mean a wholesale retreat from our international humanitarian responsibilities and the Government is well aware of this. That is why the £205 million figure does not represent the limit of our contribution to Syria this year but a baseline, allowing us to deliver more should our fiscal situation allow.
According to latest OECD data, the UK remains the second highest international aid donor in the G7 — higher than France, Italy, Japan, Canada and the United States.
The UK will continue to be a world leader in providing aid to the most impoverished countries and conflict zones. In Syria, in addition to our international aid efforts, we are committed to supporting the United Nations’ diplomatic efforts to resolve the crisis peacefully, and to support UN Special Envoy Pedersen in his vital work towards securing some kind of UN political track – the only way we will deliver a lasting and enduring settlement to the conflict.
Campaign response: UK Aid and VSO - March 2021
A number of constituents have contacted me about the future of UK Aid and its effect on VSO – the UK based international development charity.
They will know that I am a champion of our overseas aid. UK Aid goes towards vaccinating children from preventable diseases, enabling them to go to school and helping people work their way out of poverty, as well as providing food, nutrition and medical care.
Our aid also provides added value to our security and trade policies. Foreign development assistance can often make an important contribution towards in supporting stability and sustainable development for the recipient country, leading to better foreign relations and prospect for a more preferential trade deal with them.
It is in our interest to maintain our foreign aid policy because it also helps to promote UK interests abroad and ensure our position as the world’s leading soft power nation is secure.
While I share the disappointment of many in the Government’s announcement that we will be spending 0.5% of our GNI instead of 0.7% of our GDP in the coming financial year, I also understand that these are incredibly challenging times for the nation and it is important that our public finances are managed in such a way that will maximise the effectiveness of our response to Covid-19.
At a time when we need to prioritise jobs and public services, sticking rigidly to spending 0.7 per cent of our national income on overseas aid is difficult to justify to the British people. The Chancellor has made clear that we will continue to meet our commitment to the world’s poorest, spending the equivalent of 0.5 per cent of GNI on overseas aid in 2021, allocating £10 billion in last autumn’s Spending Review.
I also welcome his confirmation that the Government’s intentions to “return to 0.7% as soon as the fiscal situation allows”.
Based on the latest OECD data, the UK would remain the second highest aid donor in the G7 — higher than France, Italy, Japan, Canada and the United States. And 0.5% is also considerably more than the 29 countries on the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee, which average just 0.38%.
While I know that we can do better in the future and will continue to speak up for a return to the 0.7% target at the right time, now is not that time.
The UK will continue to be a world leader in providing aid to the most impoverished countries and conflict zones. For instance, the UK continues to be one of the biggest donors to the conflict in Yemen, committing over £1 billion in UK aid since the conflict began in 2015.
In relation to VSO – it is an organisation that I have engaged with and I under how vital their work is in many developing countries. I know their work makes a real difference to the lives of many around the world and I note their A rating by DFID and FCDO. Any cut to UK Aid will clearly have a bearing on government funding for organisations like VSO so I am keen to ensure that ministers at FCDO are also mindful of this fact. I will be seeking to engage with them directly over this issue and will ensure that constituents’ views are reflected.
Campaign response: Support UNHRC votes on Palestine - February 2021
Constituents have recently contacted me regarding the upcoming 46th UN Human Rights Council and the UK’s vote on resolutions related to the Palestinian people.
There are a number of points I wish to raise in response to the emails I received.
Constituents write that it is “not true” that the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) singles Israel out for criticism.
It is regrettable that in fact, since its inception in 2006, the UNHRC has adopted resolutions condemning Israel on 90 occasions out of a total of 171 condemnations.
Only 10 resolutions have been adopted on Iran and no resolutions have condemned human rights abusers such as China and Russia.
I share the UK Government’s view that the presence of a dedicated agenda item concerning Israel in every UNHRC session amounts to “systemic institutional bias”. I also share the Prime Minister’s view that the UNHRC’s “disproportionate” focus on Israel is “damaging to the cause of peace”.
It is simply indefensible that Israel has been the subject of more special sessions and more commissions of inquiry than any other country.
The smear that Israel is an “apartheid state” is factually incorrect, malicious, and deliberately overlooks the fact that Israel’s Arab citizens are equal under law and participate fully in the Israeli political system.
Evoking South Africa’s enforced racial segregation, which was intended to permanently benefit the white minority to the detriment of other races, deliberately distorts the security situation in the West Bank. Restrictions are intended to mitigate the security risks to both sides.
The Israeli occupation of the West Bank has continued for over 50 years not because Israel wants to rule over the territory but because peace talks – in which Israel seeks recognition and security guarantees in return for the creation of Palestinian state in the Gaza Strip and West Bank with agreed land swaps – have failed thus far.
What is clear, above all, is that the need for a renewed peace process is more urgent than ever. I welcome the landmark normalisation agreements between Israel and her Arab partners, the Abraham Accords, which renews hopes for peace. The UK Government remains committed to a two-state solution through direct negotiations, and all parties involved as well as the international community must step up efforts without delay.
I trust this adequately answers the issues constituents have raised and I will be sure to continue monitoring these developments.
Campaign reply: Anti-Israel Bias at the United Nations - February 2021
A number of constituents have written to me regarding the UK’s voting record at the United Nations.
As a strong supporter of the state of Israel I have always spoken in favour of greater UK support for the only true democracy in the Middle East and to encourage a closer UK-Israel partnership on health, tech and innovation, defence, and other areas of common interest.
In Parliament I also have the privilege of being the chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Christianity in the Holy Land, which seeks to help UK Parliamentarians gain a greater understanding of opportunities and challenges facing the Christian community in Israel, and as part of that initiative, I was pleased to host a productive and cordial meeting with the Israeli Deputy Ambassador to the UK in recent weeks, where we were able to discuss at length the support Israel is providing to Christians and future opportunities for collaboration.
As for the United Nations and Israel, I am very much been mindful of the UN’s track record of taking a one-sided, hostile approach to Israel. The many decades of bias and marginalisation of Israel at the UN have been well documented. Successive Secretary Generals have even gone on record to suggest that this an issue for the largest intergovernmental organisation in the world. Indeed former Secretary General Ban Ki-moon acknowledged that Israel has been treated poorly at the UN on a number of occasions, including during his visit to Israel in August 2013:
“Unfortunately, because of the [Israeli-Palestinian] conflict, Israel’s been weighed down by criticism and suffered from bias — and sometimes even discrimination”
In his first public address, the current Secretary General Antonio Guterres told the World Jewish Congress in April 2017:
“As secretary general of the United Nations I consider that the State of Israel needs to be treated as any other state.”
Then in August 2017, he stated that calls for Israel’s destruction are a form of modern-day anti-Semitism.
Since the inception of the state of Israel in 1948, Arab member states have consistently used the UN General Assembly as a forum for isolating and chastising Israel. With support from third-world and developing nations, the Arab states have had little difficulty passing harsh anti-Israel resolutions through the General Assembly.
Notably, the USSR and its Soviet bloc allies were significant backers and instigators of anti-Israel sentiment in the UN and helped fund and arm Arab states in conflicts that sought to “wipe Israel off the map”. Three decades on from the end of the Cold War, the strength of these malignant groups remain strong within the UN, which allows them to continue rebuking Israel.
In particular, the UN’s Human Rights Council (HRC), which replaced the Commission on Human Rights in 2006, has continued its predecessor's extreme focus on and biased treatment of issues relating to Israel. In stark contrast to the council’s mild action on pressing international human rights crises, it has been fixated on singling out Israel for criticism. Israel is the only country to appear on the HRC's permanent agenda (Item no 7), while other countries such as Iran and Sudan, notorious for their human rights abuses, are only included as part of the general debate and often given a free pass for gross violations.
The reason for highlighting the HRC is that it is one area of the UN in which the UK has been taking a more balanced approach to Israel in recent years. In 2018 the US announced that it was formally withdrawing from the HRC, citing anti-Israel bias and the body’s inclusion of human rights-violating countries as motivating the decision. This follows a strong warning from the UK warning that we would withdraw if the Council continued its anti-Israel bias in 2017.
What is important to bear in mind is that this firm statement of support for Israel at the UN was issued under then Foreign Secretary and the current Prime Minister, Boris Johnson. In fact, more recently in 2020 our Prime Minister reaffirmed his position on Israel with the following:
“I am a passionate defender of Israel. Few causes are closer to my heart than ensuring its people are protected from the menace of terrorism and anti-Semitic incitement. The UK has always stood by Israel and its right to live as any nation should be able to, in peace and security. Our commitment to Israel’s security will be unshakeable while I am Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.”
Therefore I do think in Boris we have someone who finally understands the value in standing alongside our only real ally in the Middle Eat and is seeking to address the issues that have thus far prevented us from providing further support for Israel in the UN.
However, it is also clear that more needs to be done to strengthen this work and steer our international stance away from the anti-Israel bias of the UN. What constituents have pointed out in their emails in relation to the number of times we have simply gone along with UNGA resolutions that undermine Israel’s sovereignty and tarnish its image without protest is concerning to me.
As such I will be very happy to engage with the Foreign Secretary directly to bring this matter to his and his official’s attention and urge him to consider how we can take a more pro-Israel approach going forward in the UN and in other international bodies. I will also endeavour to attend the virtual seminar on the 3rd of March by UN Watch.
Thank you to constituents again for getting in touch about this important matter and I hope the above will provide an assurance that I am as keen as they are to ensure that the UK plays its part to support Israel in the UN.
Campaign response: Please tell the government to stop arming repression - February 2021
Thank you to constituents for writing in to ask me to press the Government on the sale of arms to repressive regimes such as Saudi Arabia.
Constituents will be aware that in the case of Saudi Arabia there has been a number of legal challenges in the Courts on the UK Government’s arms export licensing policies and decisions to that country. As required by the Court of Appeal’s ruling on of UK-made arms sales to Saudi Arabia in 2019, the Secretary of State for International Trade said that the UK will be reviewing all export licences and not grant any new licences for export to Saudi Arabia and its coalition partners that might be used in the conflict in Yemen.
A revised and more rigorous methodology, which considers whether there is a clear risk that the equipment might be used in the commission of a serious violation of international humanitarian law, has since been devised, for which all licensing applications for Saudi Arabia which may be used in Yemen are assessed against.
I can assure constituents that the UK Government remains seriously concerned about the conflict in Yemen and is committed to working with international partners and allies to address the humanitarian situation there. Since the start of the crisis in 2015, our humanitarian commitment to Yemen now stands at over £770m.
Ultimately the only lasting solution to peace in Yemen is through a political settlement. The UK Government is actively supporting the UN Special Envoy for Yemen Martin Griffiths in his efforts to bring the various parties on both sides around the table to find a way forward. I will continue to support and speak up for efforts that will bring lasting peace to Yemen and the region.
I also note constituents mentioned Israel in their emails as another “repressive regime” that we should suspend arms trade with.
I am afraid I have to disagree. As the only true democracy in the Middle East, Israel is a long-term ally of the UK and shares many mutual interests, including close intelligence and military cooperation.
As a country renowned for its high-tech expertise, the UK benefits from Israeli military technology. Israeli technology that the UK uses include battlefield medical technology, techniques for dealing with suicide bombers, and technology to counter remotely-detonated terrorist bombs. Israeli drone technology such as the Watchkeeper WK45 has also been used by British forces in Afghanistan for intelligence collection. These technologies have protected the lives of many British soldiers.
An arms embargo on Israel and the wider boycott campaign stands to be damaging for UK-Israel bilateral relations, and also counterproductive to the peace process. I will continue to support efforts to restart direct peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, in order to achieve a lasting and viable two-state solution. These talks are absolutely necessary in order to address the crucial final-status issues of borders, the status of Jerusalem, Israel’s security concerns, settlements, and Palestinian sovereignty.
Campaign reply: Jagtar Singh Johal - February 2021
The plight of Jagtar Singh Johal has received much attention in the media in recent weeks and some concerned constituents have written to me about Mr Johal’s case.
I was very much concerned to read the reports in recent weeks that Mr Johal seems to have been tortured into confession. Originally from Dumbarton, Mr Johal was arrested and detained for alleged terrorism offences after travelling to India for his wedding in 2017.
Since constituents’ emails were received I note that the FCDO has now clarified that the Foreign Secretary has indeed been able to raise the case of Mr Johal with the Indian Foreign Minister when they last met in December.
They also provided the following statement:
"Our staff continue to support Jagtar Singh Johal following his detention in India and are in regular contact with his family and prison officials about his health and wellbeing.
"We have consistently raised concerns about his case with the government of India, including allegations of torture and mistreatment and his right to a fair trial.
"There has been extensive ministerial engagement on Jagtar Singh Johal's case. Most recently, the foreign secretary raised his case with Indian External Affairs Minister (Subrahmanyam) Jaishankar during his visit to India."
Ultimately it is the responsibility of the Indian authorities to do the right thing and end this prolonged period of detention without trial. But clearly the UK Government can also play a part in this by continuing to make representations with the Indian Government to seek the release of Mr Johal. I will therefore be seeking to raise this matter with the Foreign Secretary at the next available opportunity and urge him and his officials to continue to act in the interest of Mr Johal.
Thank you again to constituents for taking the time to contact me.
Campaign response: Invitation to Open Doors' 2021 World Watch List launch
Thank you very much to constituents for their kind invitation to Open Doors’ 2021 World Watch List Launch
Having attended previous launches of the WWL and hosted Open Doors’ receptions for church leaders and supporters in the past, I will be very happy to attend this year’s launch event again and to learn more about the plight of the one of the most heavily persecuted and yet overlooked faith groups globally
I will email advocacy@opendoorsuk.org to register for the event directly. It is indeed a shame that this will be an online event due to the present circumstances as I have always treasured the opportunity of meeting with Christians and church leaders from across the world and welcoming them to Parliament in previous years, although I am pleased this will mean that constituents will have the opportunity to also tune in this year and therefore widen the participation and reach of the event.
As a former church leader and a long-time champion of the freedom of religion and belief, I can give constituents my full assurance that the issue of persecuted Christians will remain a priority on my parliamentary agenda this year, and that I will continue to work with colleagues across Parliament and Government to take action to tackle all forms religious persecution, including Fiona Bruce MP, who was recently appointed to the role of the Prime Minister’s special envoy on the Freedom of Religion or Belief.
Campaign response: How you can help get Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and Anoosheh Ashooori home by Christmas
My thanks to constituents for their email asking for my help to get British-Iranian dual nationals Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and Anoosheh Ashoori home by Christmas.
They asked if I would support a parliamentary debate to discuss the UK Government’s actions of these two individuals and if I would call on the Government to take urgent action. I am of course happy to do my part to help to bring these British nationals home and will be seeking opportunity to FCDO ministers at the next possible opportunity and urge them to continue to make the strongest of representations to their Iranian counterpart. I will also show support to my parliamentary colleagues should they have any success in securing a debate by endeavouring to speak in it.
I was deeply disappointed with the recent developments of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s case including the news that she has to face a second trial.
I can only imagine the pain and the trauma she and her loved ones have had to live through over the past few years, brought on by the prolonged uncertainty she has had to face at the hands of the Iranian government while in prison.
In an appearance before the Commons in November, James Cleverly, the FCDO minister responsible for the Middle East, answered questions from MPs regarding Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s latest situation:
“We are relieved that the groundless new trial, which commenced on 2 November, was adjourned and that Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe remains on furlough, but we will continue to call on Iran to make Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s release permanent.
On 29 October, we summoned the Iranian ambassador to make clear our deep concerns about these new charges. We fully support the family’s request for officials from the embassy in Tehran to attend any court hearings. The UK Government issued a note of avowal formally requesting UK Government attendance at Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s recent 2 November hearing. So far, regrettably, we have not been granted access to Iranian judicial hearings of any of our dual British national detainees. We will continue to firmly lobby for access to them.” https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-11-03/debates/8F4FB6D1-168A-4A3D-BFDA-A7734E52D1E0/NazaninZaghari-Ratcliffe
As you well know, there are reasonable limitations to what the UK Government can do with a foreign nation that is determined to behave in the way that Iran behaves. The Government has afforded Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe diplomatic protection status due to the exceptional circumstances she finds herself in, which represents formal recognition by the British Government that her treatment fails to meet Iran’s obligations under international law and elevates the matter to a formal State to State issue. Ultimately this status can ultimately only take effect and confer protection to Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe if Iran recognises it and does the right thing by releasing her, free of any charges. Meanwhile, the UK Government is committed to continue to apply pressure on the Iranian Government.
With regards to the case of Mr Anoosheh Ashoori, the minister commented:
”The Government remains extremely concerned about all dual British nationals detained in Iran, including Anoosheh Ashoori. Iran does not recognise dual nationality and therefore does not permit access to British-Iranian detainees. We continue to urge the Iranian Government to immediately release all British-Iranian nationals arbitrarily detained in Iran to enable them to return to their families in the UK. The welfare of British-Iranian citizens in Iran is also of paramount importance, and we call on Iran to uphold its commitments under international law to treat all detainees in line with international standards. We have continued to raise the cases of British-Iranian nationals detained in Iran at the most senior levels, and discuss them at every opportunity with our Iranian counterparts.” https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2020-10-30.109524.h
Constituents can be assured that as their MP I will continue to speak up for British nationals facing unfair treatment and imprisonment abroad and press ministers over these two particular cases. Christmas is a precious times for families and it saddens me deeply to think that Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s and Mr Ashooori’s families will not have the chance to reunite with their loved ones in this season of joy and peace, but that also reinforces my resolve to do everything I can to help them.
Campaign response: Urgent request to support trafficked children
In recent months some constituents have written to me regarding trafficked children and the importance of providing adequate support to these victims.
Modern slavery and human trafficking are both important issues to tackle and the Government fully recognises this. That is why Parliament took time to deliberate and scrutinise the passage of the Modern Slavery Act in 2014 and 2015, which introduced a number of vital measures to combat slavery and human trafficking. Each year, the Government provides a detailed report on the steps they have taken to prevent modern slavery in their operations and global supply chains, which can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-government-modern-slavery-statement
We have seen witnessed issue of human trafficking played out most poignantly in the recent Channel crossings. Sadly far too many seeking to come to the UK have fallen victim to people smugglers and their false promises, instead of taking safe and legal routes. It is important that we tackle this issue at its root and deal with those who profit from it, and so it is encouraging to learn that as a result of the positive cooperation between French and UK law enforcement agencies, over a 100 suspected people smugglers have been arrested over the summer months.
For those victims of trafficking who have found their way to the UK, it is essential that legal and practical support are available to them in order that they are provided with the best information and advice as they focus on their future. It is particularly important that vulnerable, unaccompanied children are able to access this support.
Independent Child Trafficking Guardians (ICTGs) are specialist professionals who support children who have been identified as trafficked or potentially trafficked to navigate the complex systems of social care, immigration and criminal justice.
I am pleased that last year the Government successfully expanded Independent Child Trafficking Guardians (ICTGs) to one third of local authorities. This national rollout has been a phased approach, with evaluations informing the development of the programme. Such an approach ensures the most appropriate model is rolled out for child victims with the support provided reflecting the changing profile of victims, for example recognising the needs of those who are exploited through ‘county lines’. ICTGs are also best placed to work closely alongside victims to establish their immigration status in the UK and provide independent advice.
In an answer to a recent Parliamentary Question on this subject, the Minister for Safeguarding said:
“The next phase will target the geographical areas with the highest level need that are not already covered by the programme. We are currently in the process of preparing for and running a competed grants process for these additional sites.”
While I am confident that areas currently not covered by the programme will soon get coverage, I will take particular note of what constituents would like to see in relation to establishing a long-term and sustainable arrangement for each child victim of trafficking, and will certainly bear this in mind whenever I have the opportunity to debate this issue in the Commons or discuss it with Home Office ministers.
Thank you to constituents for taking the time to contact me about this important matter.
Campaign response: Deliver for the world’s most vulnerable girls
A number of constituents have emailed me concerning the important role that UK Aid plays in extending lifesaving provisions to vulnerable girls and women around the world.
They may be aware that I am a strong and vocal supporter of our international aid and I am proud of the UK’s commitment to spend 0.7% of our budget in international aid, which is helping to build a safer, healthier, more prosperous world for people in developing countries and in the UK.
British aid goes towards vaccinating children from preventable diseases, enabling them to go to school and helping people work their way out of poverty, as well as providing food, nutrition and medical care.
The Conservative Government’s Manifesto rightly commits ministers to work to empower women and girls around the world: working to end the subjugation and mutilation of women; promoting girls’ education; and tackling sexual violence in conflict.
The UK can stand proud - our work means that girls and women across the world are leading safer, healthier and more prosperous lives, which is in all of our interests. By challenging child marriage, backing the Africa-led movement to end female genital mutilation, preventing violence against women and girls, upholding sexual and reproductive health and rights, and helping girls get a quality education, we are giving girls and women the opportunity to fulfil their potential.
I am pleased that constituents mentioned DFID’s Strategic Vision for Gender Equality, launched in March 2018 and in line with the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, which aims to tackle a number of the world’s most pressing development issues.
I fully agree with them that as we look forward to the merger of DFID and FCO it is vital that highly successful and effective strategies and programmes like this remains at the forefront of our UK Aid strategy. Instead of writing to the International Development Secretary about my support for our work on supporting vulnerable girls, I will be taking a more direct approach by seeking to speak to her in person and seeking her reassurance on this matter when I next see her.
Campaign response: Stop BDS
I am grateful to constituents for contacting me to express concerns over the BDS (Boycotts, divestment and sanctions) campaign led by pro-Palestinian groups and the Supreme Court’s ruling in April.
I certainly believe that the ruling reinforced the importance of the Conservative manifesto commitment to ban public bodies from imposing their own boycotts, divestment and sanctions, which all too often single out Israel as a target.
Following the Supreme Court ruling, a Government spokesperson said: “We are committed to ensuring public bodies take a consistent approach to investments and to stop local boycotts. We will therefore bring back new legislation that addresses the technical points raised by the Supreme Court”.
The Government has pledged to “prevent public institutions from creating independent sanctions and boycotts against: Foreign countries or those linked to them; the sale of goods and services from foreign countries; UK firms which trade with such countries”.
I welcome this commitment and will urge the Government to bring forward this legislation at the earliest opportunity.
I wholeheartedly endorse Communities Secretary Robert Jenrick’s assessment that “town hall boycotts undermine good community relations, weakening integration and fuelling antisemitism”, and that “local public bodies should focus on their day jobs – such as running libraries and collecting bins, rather than running a divisive foreign policy from town halls”.
I will continue to raise these issues at the highest level and advocate for increased cooperation and collaboration with our close ally, Israel.
Campaign response: Stop Arming Saudi Arabia; End the War on Yemen
Constituents have written to me regarding the UK's continued licensing of equipment to Saudi Arabia for use in Yemen.
As required by the Court of Appeal’s ruling on of UK-made arms sales to Saudi Arabia last year, the Secretary of State for International Trade has now retaken the licensing decisions.
In retaking these decisions, the Secretary of State has considered the full range of information available to the Government. All existing and future applications for Saudi Arabia for possible use in the conflict in Yemen will be assessed against the revised methodology, which considers whether there is a clear risk that the equipment might be used in the commission of a serious violation of international humanitarian law.
The revised methodology was developed to address the Court of Appeal’s judgment. It considers all allegations that are assessed as likely to have occurred and that have been caused by fixed-wing aircraft, reflecting the factual circumstances that the court proceedings concerned.
Based on this analysis the Government has concluded that there were a small number of incidents that have been treated, for the purposes of this analysis, as violations of international humanitarian law.
However, these were isolated incidents and the analysis shows that Saudi Arabia has a genuine intent and the capacity to comply with international humanitarian law and the specific commitments it has made.
It is on that basis that the Secretary of State has assessed that there is not a clear risk that the export of arms and military equipment to Saudi Arabia might be used in the commission of a serious violation of international humanitarian law.
The Government has repeatedly assured parliamentarians and the public that it remains seriously concerned about the humanitarian situation in Yemen. Since the start of the crisis in 2015, our humanitarian commitment to Yemen now stands at over £770m.
Ultimately the only lasting solution to peace in Yemen is through a political settlement. The UK Government is actively supporting the UN Special Envoy for Yemen Martin Griffiths in his efforts to bring the various parties on both sides around the table to find a way forward. I will continue to support and speak up for efforts that will bring lasting peace to Yemen and the region.
Campaign response: Free Mahmoud Nawajaa
I would like to thank constituents for writing to me about the arrest of human rights defender Mahmoud Nawajaa.
I am concerned to read about this and in response to their request of me to “Call on the British Government to take all actions at its disposal to ensure Israel’s immediate release of Palestinian human rights defender Mahmoud Nawajaa”, I will now be contacting the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to seek an update on the status of Mahmoud Nawajaa and ask what further actions the UK Government is taking. I will be sure to forward any response I get from the FCO to constituents.
I note that in 2019 the UK Government updated its guidelines on Working with HRDs to help British diplomats to better support them, and progress is being made to protect human rights defenders in other countries.
But I agree that more must be done to ensure that the safety and rights of HRDs around the world, and having been previously made aware of the challenges facing HRDs around the world, I was able to tabled a Parliamentary Question to the Foreign Secretary in the previous Parliament seeking his assurance that the protection of HRDs would be a priority for him and his departmental officials: https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2018-10-30/185635
I will continue to speak up for and champion the rights of HRDs around the world.
Campaign response: End Child Marriage
The prioritisation of UK Aid on ending child marriage globally is a matter that constituents have been writing to me about recently.
Child marriage is an appalling practice and I am proud that the UK has been at the forefront of international efforts to end it since hosting the Girl Summit in 2014. Through the ‘Accelerating Action Against Child Marriage’ programme, we are already providing up to £39m of UK Aid over a period of 5 years (2015-2020) to support global efforts for accelerating action to end child marriage.
The programme has supported millions of adolescent girls to make healthier, safer and better life transitions including on marriage choices and childbearing.
We cannot end global poverty, realise lasting peace or prosperity without empowering girls and women in places where they are systemically disadvantaged. When a girl marries later, she is more likely to stay in school longer and have better access to information, support and resources to earn a decent income.
As we look ahead to the merger of DFID and FCO, it is vital that highly successful and effective programmes like this remains at the forefront of our UK Aid strategy. Instead of writing to the International Development Secretary about my support for our work on ending child marriage, I will be taking a more direct approach by seeking to speak to her in person about this matter when I next see her.
I am pleased that constituents mentioned DFID’s Strategic Vision for Gender Equality, launched in March 2018 and in line with the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, which aims to tackle a number of the world’s most pressing development issues.
I fully agree with them that as we look forward to the merger of DFID and FCO it is vital that highly successful and effective strategies and programmes like this remains at the forefront of our UK Aid strategy. Instead of writing to the International Development Secretary about my support for our work on supporting vulnerable girls, I will be taking a more direct approach by seeking to speak to her in person and seeking her reassurance on this matter when I next see her.
Campaign response: Amendments to the Trade Bill; Give yourself the power to protect the NHS; This is the last chance to protect the NHS from trade deals/“Please vote for NC4 on the Trade Bill” - July 09 2020
Recently I have received a number of emails from constituents regarding the importance of scrutinising the government’s work on trade deals.
Brexit presents us with a golden opportunity to ensure our trade arrangements work best for the UK and Cornwall, and I am pleased that the Government is making strong progress on trade deals with a number of key partners including the US, Japan, Korea, Australia and New Zealand.
I fully agree with constituents on the importance of parliamentary scrutiny. I am glad that government ministers already do their very best to make themselves and their officials available for engaging with parliamentary colleagues, in the chamber and elsewhere. In addition to parliamentary questions, urgent questions and statements, they also hosts regular meetings with key stakeholders. Indeed I recently took place in a virtual meeting with the International Trade Secretary to present our constituency’s concerns and priorities in the free trade agreements that she is seeking to strike.
The Government is striving to be clear and transparent with our trade objectives and the progress of our trade negotiations. The policy paper on the UK’s approach to negotiations with the EU, for instance, was published in full and accessible to all members of the public here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/our-approach-to-the-future-relationship-with-the-eu.
I am certain that there will continue to be many opportunities for MPs to examine and ask questions of the government’s trade policy. If any constituent has any specific issue that they would like to raise with me in regards to trade agreements, they are welcome to contact me as always.
However, what I cannot support is an approach that binds the government’s hands in the trade negotiations. It would not be reasonable to expect the government to provide a running commentary on the progress on their trade negotiations. Anybody who has any negotiating experience will tell you simply can’t reveal your hand or you might risk losing out on the best deal possible. By that logic, while the government needs to be transparent with its trade strategy and approach, it must not reveal every minute detail in the negotiations, as this could risk us not achieving the best possible deal for the UK.
Furthermore, Parliament and parliamentarians do not themselves carry these trade negotiation – this is the government’s role. It would be constitutionally problematic if parliamentarians started micromanaging our trade negotiations.
These are the undesirable outcomes I fear that these amendments to the Trade Bill could achieve, which could only serve undermine our negotiating stance. Therefore I cannot support them.
Nevertheless I would like to thank constituents for taking the time to get in touch with me.
Campaign response - Save Mohammed Ramadhan and Husain Moosa in Bahrain - 6 July 2020
Thank you to constituents for emailing in regarding Mohammed Ramadhan and Husain Moosa who could have their death sentences upheld in Bahrain on Monday, July 13, 2020.
I am concerned to hear about the predicament of the two men. Britain has a strong record on speaking up against the death penalty and other human rights issues – indeed I am pleased that as I compose this response, the Foreign Secretary is up on his feet in the Commons giving a statement in which he is setting out our new global sanctions regime, which will apply to perpetrators of human rights abuses across the globe.
I know that ministers remain very concerned about the situation with these two individuals. I have been assured by this latest response by an FCO minister, whom I believe is taking the right approach on the matter and one that I will continue to support:
The UK welcomed the investigation conducted by the Special Investigation Unit on the cases of Mohammed Ramadhan and Hussain Moosa and its recommendation that the cases should be re-tried – a first in Bahrain. We are deeply concerned about the death sentences given to Mohammed Ramadhan and Hussain Moosa. The Government of Bahrain are fully aware that the UK is firmly opposed to the death penalty, in all circumstances. The UK has, and will, continue to monitor the cases closely and raise concerns with senior members of the Bahraini Government.
Bahrain remains a Foreign and Commonwealth Office Human Rights Priority Country; there is more to do, but we believe progress will only be made by working with Bahrain. Assistance, which is kept under regular review, is provided in line with international standards, and fully complies with our human rights obligations and the Overseas Security and Justice Assistance process.
Campaign response - Please defend UK Aid - 6 July 2020
Recently some constituents have written to me expressing their concerns over the impact that the DFID-FCO merger may have on UK Aid and its ability to help the poorest and most impoverished people around the world.
Constituent will know that I am a supporter of our international aid and I am proud of the UK’s commitment to spend 0.7% of our budget in international aid, which is helping to build a safer, healthier, more prosperous world for people in developing countries and in the UK.
British aid goes towards vaccinating children from preventable diseases, enabling them to go to school and helping people work their way out of poverty, as well as providing food, nutrition and medical care.
Foreign aid also provides added value to our security and trade policies. Foreign development assistance can often make an important contribution towards in supporting stability and sustainable development for the recipient country, leading to better foreign relations and prospect for a more preferential trade deal with them.
It is in our interest to maintain our foreign aid policy because it also helps to promote UK interests abroad and ensure our position as the world’s leading soft power nation is secure.
At the same time, I understand the concerns that many constituents have raised with me regarding the inefficiency of certain aid and relief programmes that DFID had been running, and the need for the allocation of this budget to be made accountable to, and provide the best value for money, to UK taxpayers.
I am glad these points were shared by the Prime Minister in his statement on Global Britain in the Commons and in response to my question to him during his statement: “I am grateful to my hon. Friend. What is actually happening, of course, is that DFID and the FCO are now joining together to become a new Whitehall super-Department for international affairs, which will be of huge benefit to our ability to project Britain’s sense of mission about overseas aid. For too long, frankly, UK overseas aid has been treated as some giant cashpoint in the sky that arrives without any reference to UK interests, to the values that the UK wishes to express or to the diplomatic, political and commercial priorities of the Government of the UK.” (https://bit.ly/3hCgsn3)
It would be wrong to suggest this latest merger as cynical move to roll back on our humanitarian commitments to the world. What it does represent, is a new and innovative approach by the UK to international relations, in order to secure our values and interests in a rapid changing world – bringing together this country’s strength and expertise to bear on the world’s biggest problems.
When DFID was created in 1997 it was the right set-up for that era. I pay tribute to the incredible work that DFID officials have done over the years, earning DFID and the UK a well-deserved reputation as one of the leaders in the world when it comes to humanitarian relief and development aid.
But our world has changed since then. At present, the division of responsibility between DFID and FCO means we are unable to always be as effective as we could on the global stage.
This latest merger is about streamlining Whitehall to ensure both its effectiveness and efficiency – Having a single new Department will give the UK the change required to maximise our positive influence around the world without losing any of the expertise.
The Prime Minister has made it clear that we will continue to commit to spending 0.7% of GNI on international development, and that it will be at the core of our new foreign policy approach.
I will continue to support and speak up for our aid efforts around the world and to ensure that they remain effective and sustainable. I will try my best to attend Thursday's estimates day debate on the funding of DFID and the FCO