Hamish Falconer MP: speeches

Speeches

• 2 Jul 2026 · Siren Associates Ltd: FCDO Contracts · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness (Richard Tice) for securing the debate and for providing me with an opportunity to talk about the Lincolnshire police, which is where he started and so where I shall start as well. The hon. Member will be pleased to know that after years and years of underfunding for Lincolnshire police, we have secured a further £12 million a year in the first multi-year Lincolnshire police funding arrangement starting in January. I know that he will share my gladness in that arrangement. The hon. Member referred to a range of issues about which I will not pass comment, unless Madam Deputy Speaker wishes to instruct me otherwise, including the conduct of other hon. Members in this House and what sounds like a private law dispute with the company in question. Let me turn to some of the substantive questions he raised in relation to the contract. I was pleased to see the hon. Member briefly earlier today and I am happy to discuss some of his questions in person, which may be easier. I agree with the hon. Member that of course the Government must spend money diligently in support of UK interests and in a way that delivers value for taxpayers. I disagree with his assertion that the award of the contract under discussion does not align with those principles, so I will say a little about the contract and about Lebanon, and then I will seek to wind up. The Foreign Office currently has one contract with Siren Associates and it is subject to formal commercial oversight. As the hon. Member says, it is part of the overall ISF programme. As he knows, it is to deliver the internal security assistance programme in Lebanon to support Lebanon’s internal security forces, and to help them become more trusted, professional and better able to address Lebanon’s internal security challenges. I have seen some of our work in Lebanon. It is precisely aimed at the issues he alluded to. We must see in Lebanon the security forces of Lebanon in control of the whole country, not Lebanese Hezbollah, a group that he rightly identifies as a terrorist group proscribed in this country. The programme supports better planning, stronger police operations, improved co-ordination with the Lebanese armed forces, including in the South Litani Sector, which the hon. Member will know is the area that has been the subject of so much discussion in recent months. It is part of Britain’s wider efforts to promote stability in a highly volatile region, something that is firmly in the UK’s interests. I have seen for myself in the South Litani Sector the difference this support is making. As this House is aware, and as the hon. Member alluded to, Lebanon faces an extremely challenging security situation. The actions of Hezbollah have dragged Lebanon once again into a conflict that neither its people nor its Government have sought. We have been clear that Hezbollah’s reprehensible attacks on communities in northern Israel must cease, but disproportionate Israeli military action in Lebanon has displaced over a million people and caused significant loss of life. It is in that context that we seek to help. For all these reasons, it is vital that Lebanon’s legitimate security institutions are able to exercise state sovereignty across the country and provide security to Lebanese citizens. The UK has been a close partner of the Lebanese armed forces and internal security forces since 2009. We have provided training, equipment and advice to build their capability. That is important support to address key threats to Lebanon’s security. Turning to the contract currently underway with Siren, the Foreign Office’s procurement processes are designed to ensure that all programmes are subject to robust due diligence, that they deliver value for money and that they are aligned both with UK priorities and the interests of taxpayers, including those in Boston, Skegness and Lincoln. The contract with Siren Associates was awarded under the conflict, stability and security fund framework agreement, now known as the ISF framework agreement. It followed a competitive tender process and was open to around 80 suppliers, including a mixture of not-for-profit and commercial organisations. We received three tenders from interested suppliers, and each tender was checked for compliance with published instructions. Technical proposals were assessed against published criteria by a panel of subject matter experts, with scores moderated and agreed through a clear and documented process. Commercial submissions were evaluated separately using the published methodology, with pricing tested against affordability, framework limits, eligible cost rules and value for money considerations. Due diligence was a core part of that procurement process. That included conflict of interest checks, financial health reviews, sanctions screening and an assessment of delivery and commercial risks. The competitive process was also scrutinised by a commercial governance board, which approved the outcome before the contract was awarded. As I set out in my letter in January to the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness, the review of Siren Associates did not identify any areas that would prevent awarding the contract. The contract is currently valued at £17.2 million over three years—rather less than the increase to Lincolnshire police over the next three years, I am sure the hon. Member will be pleased to note. As he said, the contract began in September 2025 and runs until March 2028, and it can be extended until March 2030. Any further changes to the contract would be subject to a further rigorous assessment to ensure continued value for money. The hon. Member raises concerns about the size of payments to Siren Associates’ directors, reported in the company’s filed accounts. I have checked this question with the Department, and the Foreign Office’s understanding is that other than the fees for services rendered, there are no other payments to Siren Associates’ directors in its published accounts. The Foreign Office manages and monitors payments to Siren Associates for work conducted for the Foreign Office; however, we do not have oversight of transactions that do not relate to Foreign Office work. Let me be clear with the House that all relevant due diligence checks have been completed and deemed satisfactory. We will continue to keep the programme under close review, as we do with all Foreign Office programmes, to ensure that it delivers in full. We remain committed to supporting the Government of Lebanon and addressing threats to their security. Our long-standing work with the Lebanese armed forces and its internal security forces is a core part of that. That capability is central to maintaining security in Lebanon and preventing threats to the country, to the region and, ultimately, to the United Kingdom. I will conclude with three clear points. First, supporting Lebanon’s security is firmly in the UK’s national interest. Secondly, we believe the programme delivered by Siren Associates is a practical and important part of that effort. Thirdly, the contract was awarded to Siren Associates through a rigorous and proper process. Question put and agreed to .

• 1 Jul 2026 · Israel: E1 Zone Expansion · Hansard source

  More

  I would not want there to be any ambiguity about the force of our views about what is going on in the west bank. That is why we have done four rounds of sanctions and why I am setting out clearly today what the likely consequences are, should that action continue. The advisory opinion of the ICJ is important, but it is a non-binding opinion of an international court. We do not need to make a judgment on that opinion in order to take action. Indeed, we have taken considerable action over the last two years in the way in which I have set out.

• 1 Jul 2026 · Israel: E1 Zone Expansion · Hansard source

  More

  As I said, questions of justice and accountability are foremost in our mind. We raise them with the Israeli Government regularly, particularly in relation to cases that involve British nationals. We are still awaiting justice and accountability for the World Central Kitchen incident, which killed a number of British aid workers. I know of so many stories like the one my hon. Friend refers to. I remember visiting Ramallah before I was a Minister; children had been killed on the streets as we drove in to see the Palestinian Authority. There are far, far too many such cases, and we continue to make that point with force, both to the Israelis and in multilateral settings.

• 11 Jun 2026 · Freedom of Religion or Belief: Sudan · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend has been one of the most focused voices in questions around the Africa strategy and the UK’s approach to the continent. I hope he will forgive me if I focus in particular on the specific area in east Africa where, in both Sudan and South Sudan, there have been significant abuses. Later in my speech, I will turn to some of the questions of wider strategy, because as identified by both the Conservative and Liberal Democrat spokespersons, the hon. Members for Spelthorne and for Surrey Heath, respectively, the conflicts in Sudan and the wider situation in the east of Africa have regional elements. Our role in multilateral settings has been raised throughout the debate. At the UN General Assembly’s Third Committee, in the Human Rights Council, and as penholder at the Security Council, as others have referenced, and leader of the relevant core group in the Human Rights Council, we have been clear just how important the issues in Sudan are. We regularly take part in interactive dialogues with the UN’s special rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief and other relevant mandate holders to highlight the situation in Sudan. We made a statement at the UN Third Committee in October and at the 58th session of the Human Rights Council last year. Our special envoy, my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland, condemned the repression of non-Muslims in detention settings in Sudan, following terrible reports of detainees being denied food and coerced to change their beliefs, exactly as we have heard described today. As hon. Members have pointed out, we must use every lever to uphold international law. We have repeatedly condemned the countless violations committed by the warring parties in Sudan, and called on all those parties to honour their commitments to protect civilians and to uphold international law. None the less, civilians and civilian infrastructure, including places of worship, continue to be routinely, deliberately and cruelly targeted. Like the crisis of sexual violence in Sudan, the repression of basic human rights is used by the competing militias as a weapon of war and as a means of asserting dominance over the territories they control and spreading fear into the territories they do not. In that dangerous and frightening context, we pay tribute to all those courageous souls inside Sudan who are trying to hold their communities together. Religious and community leaders try against all odds to lead their own efforts in conflict prevention, reconciliation, peace building and humanitarian relief. To support the efforts of those local aid groups, the Foreign Secretary announced in April that the Government will double our funding to local humanitarian responders operating in the hardest-to-reach places. In many places, it is those community groups who deliver, in the most dangerous conditions and with the fewest resources. Supporting them is one of the most effective ways we can act to get help to those who need it most. This year, as the hon. Member for Strangford identified, the UK is providing a further £146 million in funding for humanitarian relief in Sudan, which should ensure that lifesaving aid reaches almost 2 million people. I can reassure the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Surrey Heath, that Sudan has been ring- fenced from the wider reductions in aid. Alongside our international partners, we are using every diplomatic lever available to press the warring parties to remove obstacles to aid, to guarantee the safety of civilians and aid workers, and to end the siege tactics that have trapped and starved communities. The involvement of others in the conflict has been raised a number of times. Regrettably, we believe there are at least 12 states funnelling arms into Sudan, which is obviously an inextricable part of the conflict. Members have referred to particular countries and concerns. We do engage, as the hon. Member for Spelthorne asked, with all members of the quad. I spoke to Mr Massad Boulos, the United States lead, just days ago; I know the Foreign Secretary and Baroness Chapman are in regular contact with him as well. The Foreign Secretary and I regularly meet our counterparts in the United Arab Emirates, and the Foreign Secretary has put Sudan right at the top of her agenda, including in her discussions with that country. We have taken steps in wider formats as well. We are a founding member of the coalition for atrocity prevention and justice. We are committed to advancing justice for the Sudanese people, including religious communities. Launched in February, the coalition is working to press for accountability and justice while bolstering local peacebuilding and protection efforts. We are also supporting Sudanese human rights defenders to verify and preserve information relating to attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure. The hon. Member for Spelthorne was right to highlight the importance of ensuring we have an accurate account of abuses. As many hon. Members know, in this era, making sure that reports are verified to a high standard is a priority to ensure that the information we receive is accurate and up to date. I was asked by hon. Members to comment on sanctions. I hope I will not try their patience too much by saying that we will not comment in the House on upcoming sanctions, but we have now sanctioned 24 individuals and entities aligned with or backing warring parties in Sudan. The measures are intended to send a clear message to those who fuel this war and profit from it, or are linked to the gravest violations of international humanitarian law, that they will face consequences. We must be frank. Important though all those steps are, they will not by themselves bring peace. There will be no end to the crisis and no end to the repression and violence affecting communities, including those of faith, unless the fighting finally stops. That is why the Foreign Secretary continues to work urgently with international partners to press for a ceasefire and to lay the groundwork for an inclusive, civilian-led transition, which will turn that ceasefire into a just and lasting peace. That includes working alongside various nations and organisations, including the African Union-led quintet, to support the Sudanese civil society actors who are working to reshape Sudan’s future for recovery, long-term peace and justice. We must be absolutely clear in everything we do. Any political settlement that emerges from this brutal conflict must be inclusive and protect the rights of all Sudanese people. It must respect Sudan’s diversity, including its many different faith communities, and it must create space for people of all religions and none to live freely, safely and equally under the law. The UK will continue to stand up for freedom of religious belief in Sudan, not just because it is under attack now, but because it is a test of whether peace can be sustained in future.

• 10 Jun 2026 · Myanmar: Human Rights · Hansard source

  More

  Sorry—I could not quite hear the hon. Gentleman, but I think he was asking whether we have been engaging with faith-based groups in Myanmar. We have, and the Minister for the Indo-Pacific has been focused on those questions. We recognise that the best way of reaching those most in need in these difficult times is through some of the faith-based groups in Myanmar. Alongside critical humanitarian assistance, longer-term action is needed to end impunity and break cycles of violence. We will continue to support international accountability mechanisms, including the United Nations independent investigative mechanism for Myanmar. That work is already contributing to proceedings at the International Court of Justice and to the important investigations of the ICC. As colleagues are aware, we established the Myanmar Witness project, which verifies evidence using open-source intelligence and trains local actors to do the same. I hear from colleagues the desire for further sanctions, but I am sure they are familiar with why Foreign Office Ministers are circumspect on such questions. We have imposed 19 rounds of sanctions already, targeting individuals and entities responsible for serious human rights abuses, but of course we keep these questions under regular review. It is vital to lay the foundations for an inclusive future led by the people of Myanmar. That is why we support efforts to protect civic space, strengthen local civil society and enable dialogue. That includes work to improve women’s participation in peace and security, support bottom-up approaches to governance, and reinforce economic and social rights through education, health and livelihoods initiatives. Through the John Bunyan fund, we have supported organisations working to tackle hate speech, misinformation and online harms that drive discrimination and violence. We continue to support the Rohingya, who, as many colleagues powerfully set out, have faced decades of persecution. In Bangladesh, the UK is the second largest donor to the Rohingya crisis, and the Foreign Secretary announced an additional £27 million in September 2025. That includes targeted protection and support for women and girls, delivered through local partners. My colleague, Baroness Chapman, visited Cox’s Bazar camps in November 2025 and saw at first hand the UK’s programmes of support. That reaffirms our commitment to life-saving assistance and the safe, voluntary return of refugees when conditions allow. The right hon. Member for Godalming and Ash spoke with authority and experience about how central multilateral action is on these questions. As he says, we are indeed the penholder, and we are working to keep the situation firmly on the Security Council’s agenda, including through resolution 2669 and regular meetings. At the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly, we continue to lead and support resolutions that maintain international scrutiny and mandate independent mechanisms. We work closely with the UN special rapporteur and the Secretary-General’s special envoy. We engage actively with partners in New York and Geneva to amplify Myanmar voices on international platforms. I heard the right hon. Gentleman’s suggestion for the Foreign Secretary in high-level week, and I will pass that on. We also recognise the importance of regional engagement—particularly the leadership of ASEAN and the five-point consensus. Through our international engagement, we consistently push for progress on ending violence, securing humanitarian access and advancing inclusive dialogue—all are essential to improving the human rights situation. The human rights situation in Myanmar remains grave, but withdrawal or silence is not an option, and we will certainly not sit on the sidelines. Sustained pressure, co-ordinated engagement and targeted support can reduce harm, advance accountability and help lay the foundations for a future that respects the rights of all. The resilience and courage shown by communities across Myanmar, even in the face of extraordinary hardship, demands nothing less. We are committed to upholding international human rights standards and working with partners across the House to support the aspirations of the people of Myanmar for an inclusive and peaceful future. Question put and agreed to.

• 3 Jun 2026 · Lebanon: Israel Defence Forces Operations · Hansard source

  More

  We have talked about the F-35 programme at length before. I am usually happy to go back into that debate, but as my hon. Friend has given me the opportunity, I would prefer to comment further on the impact of displacement in Lebanon, which is different in some respects from the impact of displacement in Gaza. As many right hon. and hon. Members know, there is a complicated, multiconfessional balance within Lebanon, and displacing a quarter of the population, often over long distances, has a significant impact on the stability of the country. Exactly as my hon. Friend says, forced displacement is a war crime, but to displace so many people will also have a deleterious impact on the stability of Lebanon in the long term, so it is all the more important that the practice is reversed and that we return to a genuine and sustainable ceasefire. To give one small note of optimism, we welcome the talks that the United States has been convening between Israel and Lebanon, including the talks today, and we want to see them progress.

• 21 May 2026 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  Well, I have laid out the steps that we have taken so far. Let me turn to the question of my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool Wavertree (Paula Barker). She focused in particular on sexual violence, which is about the most appalling of crimes, but if she will permit me, I want to talk a bit about the wider situation in relation to justice and accountability. British aid workers have been killed in Israeli strikes in Gaza. There is a reasonable expectation from the House, and indeed from across the world, that the Israeli Government and the Israeli justice system will ensure accountability for everyone, but particularly when foreign nationals are involved. We continue to press for further progress in relation to accountability. If the Israeli Government and the Israeli justice system cannot demonstrate that progress, international partners—including the UK—will draw adverse judgments about what that means about Israeli systems.

• 21 May 2026 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  The UK is a committed member of both the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and the Rome statute, and we encourage all states to fully abide by their commitments under both, including in relation to the International Criminal Court.

• 21 May 2026 · Imprisonment of Craig and Lindsay Foreman in Iran · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan), both for securing the debate and for his support for Craig, Lindsay and their family. I acknowledge the family’s presence, and join my hon. and learned Friend in recognising their remarkable determination; they have shown great courage in truly difficult circumstances. This is a truly terrible case, and my thoughts are with the couple and their family at this incredibly difficult time. The Foreign Secretary and I are doing all we can to support them, and to press for Craig and Lindsay’s release. I am grateful for the thoughtful contributions of Members on both sides of the House, and will do my best to respond to the points that have been raised. The couple have been detained in Iran since January last year, and are being held in Evin Prison in Tehran. Recent developments have only added to the family’s distress. I spoke with Joe, who is with us today, and with Warren, Craig’s brother, on Monday. They told me that telephone contact between the couple and their family ceased almost two weeks ago, and that there are serious concerns for their health, now that they have both begun a hunger strike. My hon. and learned Friend asked whether I can provide an assurance that they are having adequate health monitoring. I cannot provide that assurance. The consular officials have not had access to the couple in some time, but we continue to press for that assurance and for access, very regularly, and I was discussing this matter with our ambassador to Iran just earlier today.

• 28 Apr 2026 · International Parental Child Abduction · Hansard source

  More

  I would be happy to. Hon. Members are welcome to contact me directly to discuss specific cases further. For those watching in the Public Gallery or at home, I am the Minister for consular affairs, though, for the reasons that the shadow Minister set out, these cases will often be dealt with by the Minister responsible for that region—the Minister for Europe in the case of Poland, and the Minister for the Indo-Pacific in the case of Australia. The Government take the issue of international parental child abduction extremely seriously. We are proud to be a party to the 1980 Hague convention. We work with more than 80 countries to support the prompt return of children to their country of habitual residence. That is an important principle that has been supported across the House this afternoon. Where parents raise persistent problems with how the convention is applied, we raise those concerns directly with foreign Governments and will continue to do so whenever appropriate. At the same time, decisions on return ultimately rest with courts, often in the country where the child is located. Those courts must consider where the child is habitually resident, the child’s best interests and the child’s own views. Decisions about a child’s long-term future should be taken by the court that determines the child’s habitual residence. We have put in place clear measures to try to prevent international parental child abduction and have published guidance on the practical steps a parent can take when they think there is a risk. I will focus on what happens in England and Wales because, as Members have pointed out, the arrangements in Scotland and Northern Ireland operate under a different law; for the purposes of clarity and time, it is probably better to focus on England and Wales, but if any hon. Members, including the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) or his colleagues, would like to write to me with questions on Northern Ireland or Scotland, I am very happy to take them up. In England and Wales, concerned parents can get a specific issue or prohibited steps order to prevent a child from being taken out of the country. Our courts can order the Passport Office to withhold a British passport temporarily from a child at risk of abduction. The police can also issue a port alert if a parent is concerned that their child is likely to be taken abroad without their consent within the next 48 hours. We continue to support our charity partner, Reunite International, which provides online prevention guides—not just for England and Wales, but for Scotland and Northern Ireland—to help parents understand and navigate the options of support available to them. When a child is abducted and taken abroad, our consulate staff provide compassionate support to the family. That can include practical guidance on travel, local systems and procedures and help making contact with the local authorities. At the request of either parent, the Foreign Office can also formally express an interest in the case with the courts or authorities involved. We can also help families access specialist support, including through Reunite International, which should be able to provide expert advice. In relation to the 1980 Hague convention, the UK works closely with authorities seeking a return for parents. Our central authorities remain engaged throughout the process until the courts have reached a final decision. It is important to be clear on roles. Decisions on enforcement rest with the authorities and courts of the country where the child is located. Our consular responsibilities mean that we cannot interfere in foreign legal systems, just as we would not accept foreign powers interfering in ours. We cannot compel enforcement, influence court outcomes or take part in any illegal efforts to return a child. I have not seen the film that the hon. Member for Strangford describes, but I am not sure that I can use a credit card in the way he outlined to secure returns, however frustrating that may be. I recognise the deep frustration that many parents experience, especially when cases face long delays or return orders are not enforced. In those circumstances, the Government raise concerns with foreign partners at senior levels and press them to meet their obligations under the convention. I turn to Poland, a country raised by a number of hon. Members. It is a close European partner. The hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) spoke movingly about the shared history between our two countries—a history that includes my constituency of Lincoln, where many of those pilots set up as permanent residents. As she says, it is also one of the countries where we have the highest number of outstanding Hague return orders affecting British parents. We recognise the serious impact that Poland’s failure to enforce a number of return orders has had. That concern is reflected in rulings by the European Court of Human Rights and action by the European Commission. That is why we raise international parental child abduction with the Polish authorities consistently and at senior levels. I can confirm that the Deputy Prime Minister raised it with Poland’s Deputy Prime Minister Sikorski in January, the Foreign Secretary raised it with Polish counterparts in October and, earlier this month, the British ambassador in Warsaw, alongside eight other diplomatic missions, wrote to the Polish Minister of Justice to seek a meeting and press for progress on these cases. I can assure hon. Members that the UK continues to play a full role. Some of those eight countries are members of the EU, and some are not. Our officials continue to engage regularly with Polish authorities on enforcement. In April 2025, the UK Ministry of Justice hosted a joint workshop, alongside my Department, for Polish and UK authorities. We shared UK best practice on enforcement and discussed closer co-operation. We will continue to work with Poland and other partners to improve enforcement and outcomes for children and families. I recognise the sensitivity and delicacy of the issues raised in relation to violence against women and girls and the very sensitive questions around domestic abuse. We recognise concerns raised in some contexts about how the 1980 Hague convention operates in cases involving domestic abuse. That is why we have sought to take a leading international role, serving on the steering committee of two Hague conference forums examining how the conventions operate where domestic abuse is present. Both those forums took place in the past two years. This is an active and ongoing effort on our part. At home, we are working closely with victims’ organisations, the devolved Governments and the senior family judiciary in England and Wales. I am grateful for the kind recognition by the hon. Member for Hazel Grove of the progress made recently in tightening the law in that area. We are also commissioning research into how the convention operates in domestic abuse cases so that future policy is grounded in evidence and focused on improving outcomes for children and survivors. For countries that have not yet joined the 1980 convention, we actively encourage accession through both bilateral and multilateral engagement, while seeking solutions to existing cases in exactly the way the shadow Minister describes. Those efforts include the Malta process, which aims to improve co-operation in cross-border family law disputes involving children. We also work with Reunite International to support mediation as an alternative to court proceedings. Last month, in Lagos, our deputy high commissioner hosted a workshop with Nigerian partners focused on international parental child abduction and family mediation. Members have reasonably asked me for figures. If the hon. Member for Tiverton and Minehead will permit me, I might ask the Minister for Europe to write to her specifically on cases involving Poland, but the Foreign Office are aware of 177 cases in 2024 and 167 in 2025. We recognise the profound distress caused by international parental child abduction and take these cases extremely seriously. We work with partners through the 1980 Hague convention, raise concerns about enforcement and non-compliance at the highest level and press for improvement where systems fall short. We recognise that decisions on return ultimately rest with the courts and the authorities in the country where the child is located, so we must work with our partners abroad to build up their capacity where we are concerned about it. On a personal note, supporting British nationals overseas remains a core public service performed by my Department and it is a key priority for me personally. We remain committed to prevention, stronger international co-operation and supporting affected children and families throughout what I know is often a long and painful process. I join the hon. Member for Tiverton and Minehead in paying tribute to the family members in the Public Gallery.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Interpol: Red Notices · Hansard source

  More

  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.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Iran: Human Rights · Hansard source

  More

  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.

• 3 Mar 2026 · West Bank: Illegal Settlements · Hansard source

  More

  As ever, I thank my hon. Friend for her important questions. I wish to clarify quickly. The British Government oppose forced displacement in Palestine, and that is our long-held position. While we are due to update Parliament on the wider issues posed by the ICJ advisory opinion, I would not wish for there to be any ambiguity about our position. We oppose forcible displacement and, of course, there must be accountability and justice for all crimes committed right across Palestinian and Israeli territory.

• 5 Feb 2026 · Occupied Palestinian Territories: Genocide Risk Assessment · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the hon. Member for Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber (Brendan O’Hara) on opening this debate and on his contribution as the chair of the APPG. I thank every Member who has spoken with such clarity and conviction. These are incredibly important questions at a moment when questions of international justice are very much discussed, so I hope hon. Members will forgive me if I really do insist on accuracy in these questions. To answer the question straightforwardly, as I did at length on 15 September in front of the Business and Trade Committee, the British Government have conducted an assessment on the risk of genocide in accordance with our international legal obligations. As I said yesterday, or the day before, from this Dispatch Box, we consider our international legal obligations to be of the utmost priority. Many hon. Members have asked me to attend to my conscience over the course of the last 90 minutes. I am confident that I, the Foreign Secretary, the Prime Minister and the Government as a whole are serious about our international legal obligations and serious about the process and rigour that underpin them. I have confidence in that judgment not only because of the extensive scrutiny that it has received from the House, but because these questions have been tested by our own courts—most recently by the Court of Appeal in November and before that in September, when it considered the process of assessment explicitly.

• 5 Feb 2026 · Occupied Palestinian Territories: Genocide Risk Assessment · Hansard source

  More

  I think I answered something like 105 questions related to these issues in front of the Select Committee in September. I am always grateful for the opportunity to describe matters in the House in greater detail, but, given the shortness of time, I might just turn to a few other questions of accuracy. First, the International Court of Justice as not yet made a finding of genocide. It has made provisional orders. I agree with the right hon. Member for East Antrim (Sammy Wilson) about the scourge of antisemitism, but I do not agree with the question that he raises about the independence and impartiality of the ICJ. It is a vital international institution. We need to see it do its work. We undermine it if we seek to jump to the end of that process. It will be for the Court to make a judgment. It is, of course, for the Government to consider our obligations and to make an assessment of risks, which we have already done.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Iran · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful for the question. Hostile states have sought to take advantage of the freedoms in this country by failing to register agents on our soil who are seeking to act on their behalf in whatever way. The foreign influence registration scheme means that it is now an offence for someone not to declare that they are acting as an agent for another country. It may well be that those seeking to act for Iran do not register under FIRS. If they do not, they are committing an offence, and I have every confidence in our services and police force that such people will be found.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Iran · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to the right hon. Lady for her questions; I will respond to them in turn. We have taken a series of steps to ensure that anyone in this country wishing to support the Iranian Government must meet a much higher threshold to do so. We have introduced 550 sanctions, including some introduced by the last Government and some that we have built on. I will come to the sanctions we announced yesterday in due course. Let me turn to the foreign influence registration scheme. We have now put Iran at the very top tier, which means additional reporting requirements for those who would seek to act here. That provides new options to our services and our police force should those seeking to act for Iran attempt to do so in the UK. This House has heard from me, and the right hon. Lady knows from her time as Home Secretary, about the extent of the threat that Iran poses to the UK. I reassure the House that we continue to treat that threat with the utmost seriousness that it requires, and we believe that the legislative steps we have taken on FIRS, the increase in sanctions and implementation of the Hall review will all further increase our defences against such action. The right hon. Lady asks about discussions in recent days. We have been in regular discussion with all our regional partners. I am sure she will be aware of commentary over the last few days about further conversations between the Iranians and the United States. I do not wish from the Dispatch Box to get ahead of the direct participants but, as she would expect, we are in regular discussion with all those with an interest. As I said in my initial response to her urgent question, we want Iran to have no prospect of achieving a nuclear weapon. A diplomatic process to that effect is necessary, and we support all efforts by the United States and our other partners to assure that. The right hon. Lady asks about our plans regarding assets and what scenarios may entail. She will appreciate why I will not be drawn into speculation in any great detail. These are clearly very delicate moments for Iran; as she rightly says, there has been very widespread loss of life on the streets of Iran. I will also take this opportunity to say that I know that for many British Iranians, there is great anguish about the lack of contact they have been able to have with their families in Iran. I feel that most acutely for British people still detained by the Iranian regime, but it is obviously an experience felt widely across the country. The British-Iranian community make an important contribution to this country, and I understand the anguish they feel over these recent days.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Iran · Hansard source

  More

  Iran’s horrific attacks on protesters have shocked the world. In recent days, the scale of the violence and brutality has become clearer. Reports suggest that many thousands of people across Iran have been killed, and many more arrested, in what has been a brutal and bloody repression against those exercising their right to public protest. There has been a range of estimates for casualties and detentions. However, the internet blackout imposed by the authorities, which we have also condemned and which has only recently started to relax, makes it impossible at the moment to reach a reliable figure. As one young Iranian woman chillingly told the BBC: “We all know someone who was killed”. What is clear from the reports is the scale of the killing, the brutality of the crackdown and the bravery of the protesters. As the Foreign Secretary has said, the Iranian people have shown extreme courage in the face of brutality and repression. We condemn these horrific attacks on those exercising the right to peaceful protest in the strongest possible terms. This Government committed to the House that we would hold the Iranian authorities accountable, and that is exactly what we are doing. Yesterday, we announced a sweeping package of sanctions against the Iranian authorities for a number of serious human rights violations; this includes the designations of the Minister of the Interior, police chiefs and prolific Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps members for their role in the recent brutality against protesters. We continue to work with our international partners to tackle the threat posed by Iran and to hold the Iranian regime to account by a range of means. Most recently, we led the call for a special session of the Human Rights Council on 23 January. We are pleased that the council has voted to extend the independent fact-finding mission to collect the evidence of the authorities’ human rights violations, and we will continue to support those efforts. We continue to monitor developments closely and will not cease in our demands to Iran to protect fundamental freedoms, including access to information and communications. We are also continuing to take robust action to protect UK interests from Iranian state threats. Those threats are unacceptable. They must and will be defended against at every turn. We will continue to work with our allies and partners to improve regional stability and prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. The UK will continue to challenge the actions of the Iranian regime and we stand proudly on the side of freedom and human rights.

• 20 Jan 2026 · Palestine: International Humanitarian Law · Hansard source

  More

  In that period, the UK has made a range of significant determinations in relation to our policy in the middle east. Of course, we continue to consider the Court’s advisory opinion on Israel’s occupation carefully. There is lots in that advisory opinion with which we agree, and which is, indeed, already Government policy. We agree that settlements are illegal, and we have already taken strong action against them. Since this Government came into office, we have introduced three packages of sanctions related to violence against communities in the west bank, and we continue to keep these matters under review.

• 20 Jan 2026 · Palestine: International Humanitarian Law · Hansard source

  More

  We have consistently called on all parties in Palestine to comply with their international humanitarian law obligations. Where this Government have had concerns about Israel’s commitment to those obligations, we have taken decisive action. That has included stopping exports to the Israel Defence Forces that might be used in Gaza, suspending negotiations with Israel on a new free trade agreement, and last month voting in favour of the UN resolution that welcomed the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion on Israel’s obligation to allow lifesaving humanitarian assistance to reach Palestinian civilians.

• 20 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  We are deeply concerned about the detention of Palestinian children by the Israeli military and by the allegations that my hon. Friend refers to. The UK calls for all reports to be fully investigated. The arrest and detention of children must follow due process, in line with international juvenile justice standards, and we call on all parties to the conflict to grant the International Committee of the Red Cross immediate and unfettered access.

• 20 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The UK is active in seeking justice and accountability for Sri Lanka’s Tamil community. Indeed, we lead in the UN Human Rights Council on the resolution on Sri Lanka. Last year, we sanctioned Sri Lankans for human rights violations in the civil war, and we have made clear to the Sri Lankan Government the importance of improved human rights for all in Sri Lanka, as well as reconciliation. Let me take the opportunity to wish the Tamil community a happy Thai Pongal.

• 16 Dec 2025 · Africa: New Approach · Hansard source

  More

  As I have said, we will set out further details on allocations in the new year, but I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising the situation in Nigeria. To understate the position considerably, women and girls in Nigeria clearly face very considerable threats—as do Christians in Nigeria, as recent events have demonstrated. Let me take the opportunity to condemn the recent abductions. We welcome the news that some have been released, and we join the Government of Nigeria in calling for the release of all remaining abductees and for perpetrators to be brought to justice. Events in Nigeria have taken a very dark turn in recent months, and it is a high priority for the British Government to see that reversed.

• 3 Dec 2025 · Venezuela: US Military · Hansard source

  More

  As my hon. Friend the Minister with responsibility for north America—the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty)—told the House yesterday, questions about United States military action in the Caribbean and Pacific are questions for the US. The UK has not been involved in US strikes in the Caribbean. The Foreign Office currently advises against all but essential travel to Venezuela due to ongoing crime and instability. As always, our travel advice remains under regular review to ensure that it reflects our latest assessments of risks to British nationals. The UK stands with the Venezuelan people in their pursuit of a fair, democratic and prosperous future. Nicolás Maduro’s claim to power is fraudulent. The UK continues to call on the Venezuelan authorities to publish the results of the 2024 presidential election in full. The Government announced sanctions against 15 more members of Maduro’s regime in January. The UK will continue to work with our international partners to achieve a peaceful negotiated transition in Venezuela which ensures that the will of all Venezuelans is respected.

• 3 Dec 2025 · Venezuela: US Military · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the right hon. Lady for those important questions. The US is of course the UK’s principal defence and security partner. We have extensive discussions on a wide range of shared security objectives, including counter-narcotics. We are committed to fighting the scourge of drugs and organised crime, including with our partners in Latin America and the Caribbean. We are, of course, continuing to work with our international partners to achieve a peaceful negotiated transition in Venezuela, which ensures that the will of all Venezuelans is respected.