Brendan O'Hara MP: speeches

Speeches

• 24 Jun 2025 · Alaa Abd el-Fattah · Hansard source

  More

  I recall the right hon. Gentleman, before he became Foreign Secretary, asking the previous Government what “diplomatic price” Egypt had paid for the arbitrary detention of Alaa, before demanding that “serious diplomatic consequences” should be put on Egypt should it not release him. Alaa’s mother is now 278 days into a hunger strike and is critically ill, so let me ask him this: since he became Foreign Secretary, what diplomatic price has Egypt paid, and what serious diplomatic consequences can he point to that Egypt has been forced to pay since July last year?

• 23 Jun 2025 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  We have now been here for an hour, and still the Foreign Secretary appears incapable of saying whether he supports or condemns America’s actions or whether he regards them as legal, and nowhere in his statement does the role of international law even merit a mention. Will the Foreign Secretary now take this opportunity to tell us whether he believes that America’s unilateral action was compliant with international law?

• 16 Jun 2025 · Iran-Israel Conflict · Hansard source

  More

  Let us be clear: there are no good guys in this conflict. The concept of pre-emptive self-defence does not exist in international law, and nor should it. Israel’s decision unilaterally to retaliate first has made the region—indeed the world—a much more dangerous and unstable place. To what extent does the Foreign Secretary believe that the impunity that Israel has enjoyed for previous acts of aggression and war crimes was a factor in Netanyahu’s decision to retaliate first?

• 10 Jun 2025 · Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories · Hansard source

  More

  Although we welcome the sanctioning of Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, that should have happened a long time ago, and we now need to go much, much further. Further to the previous question, today’s announcement highlights the absurdity of the Government’s position. The Foreign Secretary recently described those Ministers’ views as “repellent” and “monstrous” and today’s statement accepts that Israel is guilty of human rights abuses and is in flagrant breach of international law. On what basis—legal or moral—can the Government continue to supply F-35 components, knowing that the end user will be a regime that they themselves have condemned for espousing repellent and monstrous views, and which they now accept is guilty of human rights violations and is in flagrant breach of international law?

• 9 Jun 2025 · Winter Fuel Payment · Hansard source

  More

  When the Chancellor slashed the winter fuel allowance last year, she told us that it was necessary, urgent and the responsible thing to do. It turns out that it was not necessary, urgent or the responsible thing to do after all, so is the Minister going to apologise to the millions of pensioners who were put through the wringer so cruelly and unnecessarily? I think he knows that they deserve an apology from this Government. Having performed one U-turn, will the Government now do the same for the country’s poorest families and abolish the two-child cap?

• 4 Jun 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q3. The Prime Minister has repeatedly told this House that it is not for him or his Government to determine what is and is not a genocide. That position is no longer tenable, because at the High Court recently, the Prime Minister instructed his lawyers to argue that in Gaza,“no genocide has occurred or is occurring”.The truth is that his Government have made a determination; the question is whether he has the courage of his convictions. Will he repeat from the Dispatch Box what he told his lawyers to argue in the High Court—that he believes that no genocide has occurred or is occurring in Gaza?

• 20 May 2025 · Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories · Hansard source

  More

  May I repeat the question asked by the hon. Member for Bristol Central (Carla Denyer), which went unanswered? Last week, 65 members of nine political parties in both Houses wrote to the Prime Minister, asking him to publish the most recent genocide assessment—the one that persuaded him to send his lawyers to the High Court to argue that “no genocide has occurred or is occurring”. Will the Government now publish that assessment, so we can all understand how on earth they arrived at the conclusion that the horrors we have witnessed, day in, day out, for months in Gaza do not constitute a genocide?

• 14 May 2025 · Gaza: UK Assessment · Hansard source

  More

  I have just returned from the High Court this morning, where Government lawyers will argue, in defending the continued supply of F-35 components, that the evidence available does not support a finding of genocide, and that there is a “tenable view that no genocide has occurred or is occurring”. It appears that the Government—whether they have told the Minister so or not—have already made a determination, and that explains why they have no intention of asking for an independent assessment of whether a genocide is likely. The Government know that if they did ask for one, it would reveal an unpalatable truth that would prevent them from supplying Israel with the weapons that it needs to continue its merciless onslaught. It really is as grubby as that, isn’t it, Minister?

• 14 May 2025 · Ministerial Code: Compliance · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) for securing this urgent question. It is not the first time that she has had to raise this issue during her parliamentary career. It appears that whoever is on the Government Benches conveniently forgets everything they said when they were on the Opposition Benches. The Leader of the House will recall the former shadow Leader of the House, the right hon. Member for Walsall and Bloxwich (Valerie Vaz), warning the then Tory Government: “Parliament must be told first: we are not irrelevant.” —[ Official Report , 19 March 2020; Vol. 673, c. 1169.] That warning is as true for this Labour Government as it was for the previous Tory Administration. Is what we are witnessing a case of acute amnesia or simply a belief that it is now their turn to treat Members of the House with contempt?

• 13 May 2025 · Gaza: Humanitarian Situation · Hansard source

  More

  Last week the United Nations issued a report describing the situation in Gaza as “one of the most ostentatious and merciless manifestations of the desecration of human life and dignity”. The Government have always insisted that it is not for them but for the courts to determine what is and what is not a genocide, but the Minister will know that the genocide convention also puts a legal obligation on states to act to prevent a genocide. Does he believe that the UK has fulfilled its legal obligation under that convention to prevent a genocide in Gaza?

• 13 May 2025 · Point of Order · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. On 20 March the Foreign Secretary said in relation to the conflict in Gaza: “There are atrocities on both sides”. —[ Official Report , 20 March 2025; Vol. 764, c. 529.] On 24 March, I wrote to the Attorney General asking how and when His Majesty’s Government arrived at that determination. I further asked the Attorney General about the legal implications of the UK selling weapons to Israel directly or indirectly, and whether he believed it legal to supply those weapons when the Government had decreed that Israel was guilty of atrocity crime. On 8 April I received a letter from the Attorney General’s Office saying that he did not consider this to be his responsibility and that my letter had been passed to the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. It is now 13 May, seven weeks after I first wrote to the Attorney General, and I still have had no reply. This is not new, Madam Deputy Speaker. The record will show that I had to raise a similar point of order in November, when neither the FCDO nor the Attorney General’s Office responded to my letter about the Foreign Secretary’s interpretation of the genocide convention. Can you advise me on how I can get a reply to my questions, and how we as Back Benchers can have confidence that the Government will answer Members’ questions, even those that they wish had not been asked?

• 25 Apr 2025 · Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Madam Deputy Speaker, allow me to veer ever so slightly from my promise to remain within the scope of the Bill in order to answer the hon. Lady’s question. I think I joined the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament when I was 16, before I joined the SNP. I have been a lifelong opponent of nuclear weapons. When I stood in my constituency in 2015, 2017, 2019 and 2024, I made no bones about my position on nuclear weapons, and my constituents voted for me. She suggests that this is a massive issue, but it is not an issue for the people of Argyll, Bute and—now—South Lochaber. I would gently point out that my position is also the position of the Labour party in Scotland. I will conclude. The introduction of a regional immigration policy to reflect the needs of the circumstances at the time has worked in Australia, Canada and other parts of Europe, and there is no reason, other than a complete lack of political will, why that cannot happen here. We have heard a lot of quotations from the Migration Advisory Committee, and it would be remiss of me not to quote it myself. It has said that “the current migration system is not very effective in dealing with the particular problems remote communities experience… If these problems are to be addressed something more bespoke for these areas is needed.” It said that six years ago. Here we are, six years on, and while we have had a change of Government and a change of Secretary of State, we have seen absolutely no progress on this issue. Indeed, I dare say that what we have heard today is the Labour party backtracking on it. Allow me to finish by saying this: we need a bespoke immigration policy in Scotland. We have been done in by the insanity of Brexit. We are reeling from what has happened to us and the impact it is having, particularly on our rural communities. Everyone can see that, but there is intransigence on the part of the Government to recognise what is in front of their nose. I fear for them that the people of Scotland will recognise that when it comes to Scotland and the needs of Scotland, we do not figure particularly highly on this Government’s agenda.

• 25 Apr 2025 · Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I have rarely in my life been more popular. I give way to the hon. Member for Mansfield (Steve Yemm).

• 25 Apr 2025 · Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend the Member for Perth and Kinross-shire (Pete Wishart) cannot respond to the hon. Gentleman, so allow me to do so: what amendment? What is he talking about? He has got no idea. To return to the point, the UK Government, having taken that away from the rural communities in Scotland, now have a responsibility to provide a solution. If they will not do it, for ideological reasons, the least they can do is allow the Scottish Government to do it, because we cannot go on this way. I am not surprised that all we have seen from Labour Members is them lining up to kick the Scottish Government and the SNP. That is politics; and, to be fair, they would be as well taking every opportunity to do it, because they will probably not last for long. By 2047, the proportion of working-age people in Scotland will be smaller than it is now, and the number of people of pensionable age is expected to rise. That is a huge threat, not just to our economy but to our ability to provide public services. Of course, there is no magic bullet, and nobody has said that about this Bill, but what it proposes is a hugely important tool in the toolkit.

• 25 Apr 2025 · Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I will make some progress, because I said I would stick to the scope of the Bill. The final thing I will say to the hon. Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Dame Meg Hillier) is that I do not think it is beyond the wit of everyone in this place to come to an equitable solution. I do not think that throwing up this smokescreen on Second Reading— [ Interruption. ] It is a smokescreen—is a useful thing to do. Let us give this Bill its Second Reading and take it into Committee, and let us dig in to that minutiae, because unless and until we do so, this House will continue to bat this away, and it is not a sustainable position. I do not need to remind the Secretary of State that Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain in the European Union. We did that, I believe, because we recognised the enormous benefits that membership of the European Union brought to Scotland. One of the greatest of those benefits was freedom of movement—the ability for our people to move freely across Europe and for Europeans to come here. There was hardly a café, hotel, guest house or pub in Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber that did not have a young European—more often than not, several young Europeans—working in it. They filled essential seasonal gaps in the local labour market, allowing businesses to remain open and serve the needs of visiting tourists. That is all gone, and once thriving businesses are now struggling to find the staff they have depended on. Many hitherto successful seven-days-a-week businesses are now operating five, four or sometimes only three days a week, and not because the visitors have gone but because they simply cannot get the staff. The added bonus was that when these bright, young, ambitious Europeans came, they often decided to stay, or they would return later to raise a family and set up home in Scotland. Indeed, it was a cornerstone of Argyll and Bute council’s plan for economic regeneration. That whole plan was predicated on continuing to have access to EU nationals and being able to attract them into the area. Through no fault of our own, and despite voting overwhelmingly to remain in the European Union, the insanity of Brexit has taken that away from them. The UK Government, having taken that away from them, now have a responsibility to provide a solution, particularly to help those rural areas suffering from depopulation.

• 25 Apr 2025 · Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Arbroath and Broughty Ferry (Stephen Gethins) on the way in which he opened the debate. I thank him for laying out why it is essential that until Scotland is an independent nation, free to return to the security and stability of the European Union, the very least we need to secure our economic future is a Scottish visa. Such a visa would allow the Scottish Government to bring people to Scotland to work in the parts of the economy in which they are most needed—in tourism, hospitality, care, our fishing industry, or wherever those closest to the problem can identify a need. You will be delighted to hear, Madam Deputy Speaker, that I will not speak for long and will keep to the scope of the Bill. The Secretary of State will know that in my constituency of Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber, and indeed across rural Scotland, we have a large ageing population—a population that is therefore largely non-economically active—and that is utterly unsustainable. There is a demographic crisis coming, because we are suffering from population decline. The Secretary of State knows that rural Scotland—Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber in particular—desperately needs people. It needs people to come and live, to open a business, to invest, to work, to put down roots, and hopefully to raise a family. Not only does he know that, but previous Secretaries of State have known that. Not only does the Home Secretary know that, but previous Home Secretaries have known that. But because of the anti-immigration hostile environment on the part of the previous Government and, I have to say, the complete moral cowardice on the part of this Government, it is an issue that they will not address. Indeed, it would appear—I hope I am wrong—that the Government are so craven that they will not even allow a vote on the Bill. I hope that I am wrong and that we can divide on the Bill. This is not a crisis that has just emerged and it has not taken anyone, least of all the Government, by surprise; this has been going on for years. We have talked about it time and again in this place, but for reasons that have nothing to do with Scotland, and indeed that work against Scotland’s best interests, no one in this place seems prepared to address it. More than five years have passed since February 2020, when I asked the then Tory Scotland Secretary about the introduction of a Scottish work visa. He replied that the Government had “no plans to devolve immigration. The new system will recognise the needs of all the nations and regions of the UK, including Scotland.” In September this year I asked the new Labour Minister—the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, the hon. Member for Midlothian (Kirsty McNeill)—the exact same question, only to be given an almost identical reply. She said: “I look forward to working with the Home Office and engaging with sectors on ensuring that immigration works for all parts of the UK.” —[ Official Report , 4 September 2024; Vol. 753, c. 299.] So, five years apart, and a new Secretary of State and a new Government, but almost an identical answer. That is not change; that is continuity.

• 25 Apr 2025 · Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  As long as we are, unfortunately, part of the United Kingdom, the United Kingdom Government will have a responsibility and a role to play. We should be allowing asylum seekers to work and contribute to the economy, because the current system is a complete nonsense. We should also be looking very closely at how we treat these vulnerable individuals. I do not think we should be taking any lectures from the previous Government or this Government on how we treat the most vulnerable people.

• 25 Apr 2025 · Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  claimed to move the closure (Standing Order No. 36). Question put forthwith, That the Question be now put.

• 25 Apr 2025 · Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  If the ferries are such a catastrophe, would the hon. Gentleman care to explain why, in a constituency with probably more ferries than any other in the UK, I was re-elected in 2017, 2019 and 2024 with the largest SNP majority in Scotland? If the ferries are that bad, why do the people who use them vote SNP?

• 25 Apr 2025 · Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  First, I would question the language about asylum seekers being a burden. I think asylum seekers are here in the main for good, honourable and honest reasons. I do not view them as a burden. I believe that the Scottish Government already take care of that, and yes, there will be cross-border co-operation until such time as we can have our own independent asylum policy. But again, I do not see that as being a great barrier that should stop a good idea from being further discussed. The Government are continuing what the previous Government did and are absolutely oblivious to the needs of rural Scotland. They will not do anything, because essentially it is not politically expedient for them so to do.

• 24 Apr 2025 · Co-operation with Devolved Governments · Hansard source

  More

  Of course, if the Government were serious about co-operating with the devolved Government, tomorrow’s Second Reading debate on devolving immigration policy to Scotland, which has been secured by my hon. Friend the Member for Arbroath and Broughty Ferry (Stephen Gethins), would not be necessary. The Minister will recall that, in the run-up to the general election, Labour’s Deputy Leader in Scotland, Jackie Baillie, said that they would be open to talks on this issue and, of course, it would be unthinkable that she would have said such a thing just to gain short-term electoral advantage. Therefore, having waited a year, can the Minister tell us when he expects those talks to open?

• 24 Apr 2025 · London Sudan Conference · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) on securing this urgent question and laying out the unimaginable horror of what is currently happening in Sudan. There is a very real danger that the catastrophe in Sudan will spread to neighbouring countries. Since 2023, an estimated 800,000 Sudanese refugees have fled to Chad, which is already one of the poorest countries in the world and ranked No. 1 in the list of countries at risk of genocide. What assessment has been made of the impact of overseas aid cuts to the likelihood of genocide occurring in Chad, and what are the Government doing proactively to prevent a genocide in Chad?

• 2 Apr 2025 · Gaza: Israeli Military Operations · Hansard source

  More

  Last week, the Foreign Secretary was unequivocal in saying that both sides—Hamas and Israel—were guilty of committing atrocities. Does the Minister agree with the Foreign Secretary that that is the case?

• 20 Mar 2025 · Conflict in Gaza · Hansard source

  More

  The inhumanity and depravity that we witnessed on Tuesday defies belief, but it shows that after 17 months, Israel understands fully what impunity is, because Netanyahu shattered that fragile ceasefire, killing 400 civilians sheltering in tents—mostly babies and toddlers—knowing that there would be absolutely no consequence for his action. Can the Foreign Secretary think of any other conflict at any other point in history when the UK would have accepted one of its closest allies and military partners designating babies and toddlers as legitimate military targets?

• 18 Mar 2025 · Military Co-operation with Israel · Hansard source

  More

  rose—