Monica Harding MP: speeches

Speeches

• 8 Apr 2025 · Blair Mayne: Posthumous Victoria Cross · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for securing this debate. On 8 May, this House, together with the whole country, will celebrate the 80th anniversary of victory in Europe. This important milestone provides us with a renewed opportunity to reflect on the sacrifices and struggle of that greatest generation, who fought to protect Britain and preserve our freedom and democracy in the face of fascism and tyranny. It is our duty in this House and in our communities across the UK to recognise and celebrate the contributions made by our incredible service personnel to the security, defence and prosperity of this country. That must include reflecting on the service of all current military personnel who protect us today, the living veterans who have finished their time in the armed forces, and the servicemen and women from previous generations who are no longer with us. They are, all of them, bound together by a thread of service and sacrifice for this country. We must continually renew our gratitude and remembrance of that service. Therefore I welcome today’s incredibly valuable debate. It shines a spotlight on the gallantry and heroism of one of the UK’s most decorated servicemen, Blair Paddy Mayne, whose proposed recognition with a posthumous Victoria Cross I warmly support. As the premier operational gallantry award, it is worth while reminding ourselves of its requirements. It is awarded for “most conspicuous bravery, or some daring or pre-eminent act of valour or self sacrifice, or extreme devotion to duty in the presence of the enemy”. It is clear that Blair Mayne personified the highest standards of bravery in the face of the enemy and across his career in the Special Air Service, and on that basis merits the award of a Victoria Cross. Blair Mayne was one of the first leaders of the SAS following its formation in 1941. It was designed with the intention of conducting guerrilla warfare against the axis powers, which were at that time on their march across Europe, Africa and Asia. The SAS’s role in the second world war was unconventional but crucial. Its work to disrupt operations behind enemy lines, particularly through its use of small-scale raids, intelligence gathering and support for networks of resistance groups against the fascist occupiers, was vital in undermining the axis’s political and military strength. As part of the then regiment, Mayne showed extraordinary valour and heroism while carrying out dangerous and daring raids in north Africa, Italy and France, harassing Nazi and fascist supply lines. Indeed, in November 1941 Mayne led one of the first SAS missions considered to be a major success—an attack on a Libyan airfield, which saw dozens of enemy aircraft destroyed. In January 1943, following the capture of Colonel David Stirling, Mayne took over the command of the SAS, going on to lead his men in campaigns in Sicily and Italy, before the SAS took part in the D-day landings. These are just a few examples of the conspicuous bravery displayed by Mayne in his leadership of the SAS. It is important to remember too that for Mayne and all the members of this elite regiment, being apprehended by the Nazis from 1942 onwards would likely have meant their summary execution at the hands of their captors. Consistently operating under such conditions requires, without doubt, exceptional bravery. Mayne is already one of our most decorated veterans. He was one of only eight people during the second world war to be awarded the Distinguished Service Order on four occasions—at the time the second highest gallantry award behind the Victoria Cross. This serves as an important testament to the consistency of his bravery, leadership and resolve, often in the face of odds stacked against him. It is only right and fair that we honour that courage today through the award of a posthumous Victoria Cross. Indeed, the award of a Victoria Cross would honour not only Mayne but in many ways the role of our special forces writ large, both historically and to this day. For many people, their knowledge and understanding of the SAS will have been informed by the BBC’s dramatisation of the regiment’s founding in “SAS: Rogue Heroes”, which Members have already extolled. The series has had an important impact, highlighting the enormous contribution of the SAS in securing the freedom we celebrate today and protecting it still. It has also highlighted the important work of the BBC in bringing stories such as these to the public’s attention, impressing on all of us the sacrifices and courage of our armed forces. There are now only a few living veterans of that greatest generation who can recall their stories and remind us of the price that they and so many others paid to defend our way of life. Just last month we said goodbye to another Paddy, Group Captain John “Paddy” Hemingway, who was the last surviving pilot of the battle of Britain and who, as part of the RAF, defeated the Luftwaffe and defended our country from invasion. We have a responsibility to champion their voices and their deeds, and to continue to recognise acts of outstanding valour and heroism in our armed forces. That is why I warmly support the award of a posthumous Victoria Cross to Blair Mayne, the decoration that King George VI said had “so strangely eluded him” but is within our gift to correct.

• 7 Apr 2025 · Israel: Refusal of Entry for UK Parliamentarians · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for providing advance sight of his statement. The Liberal Democrats wholeheartedly support his rebuke of the Israeli Government for detaining two hon. Members of this House and denying their entry into the state of Israel. I am disappointed, however, that this House has not been able to speak with one voice on this matter. I was shocked by the leader of the Conservative party’s comments yesterday morning, and I am deeply disappointed by the shadow Minister’s comments today. The Liberal Democrats believe that Members should be free to advocate without fear or favour on issues of national and global importance. We believe it is vital for parliamentarians to be able to see for themselves the realities of the situations we discuss in this Chamber. Israel’s actions are inconsistent with the behaviour we would expect from an ally and from a democracy, and it is regrettable that the leader of the Conservative party and the party spokesperson do not agree. Transparency in the middle east is vital for securing a long-lasting political settlement, which must be based on openness and trust. Has the Foreign Secretary since made clear to his counterpart in the Israeli Government that such treatment of parliamentarians is unacceptable, and that no further parliamentarians will be treated in that way or denied entry into Israel? Will the Foreign Secretary also raise with his counterpart this morning’s deeply disturbing reports of Palestinian detainees being subjected to torture, and this weekend’s report that the initial IDF account of the deaths of 15 aid workers at the hands of Israeli forces has been contradicted by video footage from a victim’s mobile phone?

• 31 Mar 2025 · Myanmar Earthquake · Hansard source

  More

  I share the grief expressed by the whole House for the people of Myanmar. It is heartbreaking that a country that has already suffered four years of brutal civil war now faces further devastation. I wholeheartedly welcome the Government’s announcement of £10 million to support the emergency response. It is vital that these funds reach those most severely impacted by the disaster as quickly as possible. Can the Minister confirm how much funding has been dispensed so far and outline the steps her Department is taking to translate funds into lifesaving aid as quickly as possible? As the death toll continues to rise and the ultimate scale of the disaster becomes clearer, will the Minister confirm that the Government will continue to increase our humanitarian support to match the needs on the ground? In the spring statement, we saw that the UK’s development spending faces a cliff edge in 2026, with almost £5 billion in cuts anticipated by that time. That will reduce the UK’s ability to respond to disasters and provide the long-term consistent support that rebuilding Myanmar and its economy will require. Will the Minister confirm that bilateral aid to Myanmar will remain a priority? The military junta in Myanmar has long blocked aid access for civilians in opposition-controlled areas. Aid workers have been attacked, and we hear reports that aid workers responding to the earthquake fear junta arrest and interference. What are the Government doing to ensure that humanitarian aid is getting through and that responders on the ground can work free from repression? Will the Minister outline the Government’s diplomatic response to the wider conflict and their response to what the UN are calling reports of human rights violations? Myanmar needs our support in the aftermath of this tragedy. As the world’s spotlight turns to it, I urge the Government to take this opportunity to use every lever they can to push for an end to conflict and for a future democracy.

• 7 Mar 2025 · Protection of Children (Digital Safety and Data Protection) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am very pleased to speak in support of the safer phones Bill. I speak as the mother of four teenagers who goes into battle nearly every day on screen time, as a governor for eight years at a local school who has seen the damage that screens can do to young people’s mental health, and as a Member of Parliament who might be able to do something to turn the tide on the damage to our young people, who are being used as guinea pigs in the rapid advance of technology. We are well into the tech revolution, which will change everything. It is a force for good but, as with previous industrial revolutions, there are victims. In the first industrial revolution the victims were the children in the factories, and today our children need protection against a tsunami of tech and its attendant harm. The Bill, as originally intended, was a crucial step in safeguarding the wellbeing of children in our digital world, and I sincerely thank the hon. Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister) for all his work to date in campaigning for safer smartphone use for children. As many Members have pointed out, the evidence before us is undeniable, and I will not rehearse what has already been said. However, I want to pull out a few facts. A total of 2.5 million children in the UK are using social media under age, and, crucially, before they have developed the necessary skills to navigate complex and risky online environments. Extended screen time has also spiked rapidly and become the norm for most young people. I commend the report from the Education Committee, which revealed that nearly a quarter of children now use smartphones in a way that is consistent with a behavioural addiction, and in some cases screen use starts as early as six months. By the time children reach the age of 12, nearly all of them have smartphones. Social media and mobile applications are not just tools for communication; many are inherently addictive by design, engineered to keep users engaged, whatever the cost, and I know this through my children. I echo the words of many Members today on the addictive nature and the battles that parents have. This is placing huge pressure on parents, who are in a battle with addictive algorithms that they cannot possibly win. I wholeheartedly supported the initial provisions in the Bill, as did hundreds of my constituents in Esher and Walton who wrote to me in support of the campaign behind it. Although I continue to support the Bill, I must express disappointment that it has been significantly watered down. What could have been a bold step in child protection has been reduced to mere provisions for Government research commitments and guidance revisions—actions that do not require legislation. The Government already committed to commissioning academic research on smartphone use last autumn, partly in response to the very welcome campaigning by the hon. Member for Whitehaven and Workington, and we already have overwhelming evidence supporting stronger regulation. How much more evidence do the Government need? Headteachers across my constituency and parent groups in Molesey, Esher, Walton, Thames Ditton and Hersham have convened local campaigns, with nearly 1,000 signatories to parliamentary petitions on this issue, expressing huge concerns about excessive smartphone use, unregulated social media and the inadequacy of current regulations. I know that schools in my constituency were particularly encouraged by initial indications that the Bill would require schools to be mobile-free and would ensure Government support for schools as they seek to enforce effective and safe learning spaces. The headteacher of Esher high school, Andy King, illustrated to me just how much creative problem solving teachers are having to adopt in order to keep children focused on learning, when they are walking around with such an addictive invention right in their pockets. His school has been compelled to enforce a “closed backpacks only” rule, as opposed to open bags such as handbags, so that children are not distracted by seeing a notification pop up in their open bags in class. All the headteachers I met in my constituency talked about the inattention caused by phones and the inability to focus on a whole book. Research shows that it can take up to 20 minutes for pupils to refocus after engaging in non-academic digital activity. The rise in screen time has also been linked to declining attention levels, language skills and sleep quality. It is both a learning distraction and a serious health concern. As we celebrate International Women’s Day tomorrow, we should not ignore how children’s access to smartphones can undermine healthy relationships and the safety and wellbeing of women and girls. The Children’s Commissioner for England found that 79% of children had encountered violent pornography before the age of 18, with the average age of first exposure being just 13 years old. I know of a constituent whose child saw extreme pornography at 13 and was so traumatised that his efforts to clear his mind caused him to develop OCD. We also know that online sexual crimes against children have risen by 400% since 2013, and a staggering 81% of girls aged seven to 21 have experienced some form of threatening or upsetting behaviour online. I appreciate what the hon. Member for Whitehaven and Workington has done to build the case for Government action, but it is a pity that we will not be able to test the will of Parliament for a much more ambitious approach to online safety from this Government. The Secretary of State has expressed frustration with gaps in the Online Safety Act and its implementation. This Bill could have been used to make urgent amendments to it. Why have the Government not used that opportunity, particularly when the Secretary of State indicated that there would be no new legislation any time soon? I urge the Government to stop hiding behind endless reviews and take concrete steps—including two specific ones—to protect young people now. First, services must be required to ensure minimum age limits on their platforms. Unfathomably, Ofcom’s draft children’s codes do not impose an obligation on regulated services to enforce their own terms of service on the minimum age of users on their platforms. In consultation on the codes, children’s charities argued for that and have campaigned on it ever since. Ofcom is not listening, and the Government are doing nothing to address this. The Bill could and should have been used to plug that gap, regardless of any additional evidence the Government feel they need before making further policy or legislative commitments. Will the Government commit to doing that? Secondly, with Meta’s announcement in the last couple of months that it is removing protections for vulnerable users from its content moderation policies, the Online Safety Act should be amended to introduce a mechanism preventing regulated services from rolling back protections in their terms of service, and setting minimum standards. Without a prohibition on reducing protections—even for children—under the Online Safety Act, platforms can keep rolling back on their user safety protections until they hit the level that is harmful for children. That cannot be right, but it can be fixed with an amendment to the Online Safety Act. Will the Government agree to use the Bill to do that? The Bill could have been a vehicle for real policy action. Although its provisions are not as powerful as I initially hoped, some progress is better than none, so I will be supporting it. I urge colleagues across the House not only to support the Bill, but to push for the stronger, bolder reforms that our children desperately need. To say that it is inevitable is not enough. Every day that we wait is another day that a child spends 18 hours online, potentially at grave risk. I urge the Government and us all to act.

• 4 Mar 2025 · NICs Increase: Impact on Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  My constituent Alison runs Stepping Stones nursery school, which has been operating in my constituency for 30 years, offering wraparound care to busy families. The increase in employers’ national insurance contributions alone will cost it £16,000 a year and it is still struggling with an increase in utility costs, while other nurseries in the area are also struggling and, indeed, closing. Headmasters, a hairdresser in Walton, is struggling with £15,000 of extra costs, owing primarily to this tax rise. Can the Minister explain to businesses in Esher and Walton how the Government’s national insurance policy will deliver growth or higher living standards, given that it seems to be doing neither?

• 26 Feb 2025 · Online Safety Act: Implementation · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I thank the right hon. and learned Member for Kenilworth and Southam (Sir Jeremy Wright) for organising this important debate and for his continued work scrutinising this legislation. The Online Safety Act was a landmark step towards making the internet a safer place, particularly for our children, but its implementation has fallen far short of what Parliament intended, hampered by Ofcom’s slow pace and limited ambition. Initially, the Act was designed to ensure that tech companies take responsibility for protecting users, especially children, from harmful content, but the current approach taken by Ofcom undermines that intent in several ways. We have waited more than a year for Ofcom to complete its consultation on the illegal content codes of practice, but those codes fail to enforce a robust safety-by-design approach. Instead of proactively mitigating risks, many of its measures focus only on responding to harm after it has already occurred, and the children’s safety codes, which are still in draft, appear to follow a similarly disappointing trajectory. Features such as livestreaming, ephemeral content and recommender algorithms—tools that are frequently exploited for the purpose of online abuse—are also not meaningfully addressed in the current framework. The Act has significant shortcomings in that it also allows companies to be deemed compliant simply by following Ofcom’s codes, regardless of whether their platforms remain unsafe in reality. This means that tech giants are permitted to hide behind a regulatory shield rather than being forced to address known risks on their platforms; all the while, children continue to be exposed to harm. The Act also explicitly requires protections tailored to different age groups, but in its implementation of it, Ofcom treats a seven-year-old and a 17-year-old as if their online safety needs are identical. In doing so, it has fundamentally failed to recognise how children’s development affects their online experiences and their vulnerabilities. The action on fake and anonymous accounts has been slow and weak. This was a huge area of focus for parliamentarians before the Act was passed, and Ofcom itself identified it as a major risk factor in crimes such as terrorism, child sexual exploitation, harassment and fraud. As we approach 18 months since the passage of the Act, there has been no change for UK users. Instead of prioritising verification measures, Ofcom has pushed them to a later phase of implementation, delaying real action until at least 2027. That is unacceptable, especially when Ofcom’s own research shows that over 60% of eight to 11-year-olds are active on social media, despite existing age restrictions prohibiting it. The Government’s and Ofcom’s delays in introducing user identity verification measures are unacceptable. The harms associated with fake and anonymous accounts are deeply personal and painfully real, with millions of Britons suffering from online abuse, scams and harassment each year. I hope the Minister can provide a robust explanation for the timidity and delay, and rule out any suggestion that the delays were a result of lobbying pressures from platforms. The best assurance she could give today would be a commitment that the introduction of verification measures will be brought forward to 2026, so that UK internet users are better protected. In short, I ask the Minister to recognise the urgency of taking the following action. Ofcom must revise its codes to require proactive risk mitigation; tech companies should not be allowed to claim compliance with the regulatory framework, all the while continuing to expose users to harm; platforms must be held accountable if they fail to meet the real safety standards; and protections need to be specific to different age groups, so that younger children and teenagers receive appropriate levels of safety and access.

• 24 Feb 2025 · Social Media Use: Minimum Age · Hansard source

  More

  As a parent of four teenagers, I do battle on screen time every single day—so much so that my children actually thought I was coming into Parliament to give screen time to the nation. I think it is grossly unfair to blame parents or attribute responsibility to them when most parents are having this battle every single day. With the addictive algorithms on social media platforms, it is impossible for children to resist. I have a child who was 16 last week and is sitting his GCSEs. He is finding it very difficult to look away from his phone and concentrate on his studies because of these algorithms.

• 24 Feb 2025 · Ukraine · Hansard source

  More

  I am proud that more than 600 Ukrainians have been hosted in my constituency through the Homes for Ukraine programme. Three years on, my constituents stand with Ukraine. They know that Ukraine has protected Europe’s frontline for three years. They know that Ukraine’s fight is one that affects us all, and that if Ukraine loses, Europe loses, and they know that Ukrainians are fighting for the values of our forebears: the British values of democracy and freedom. Will the Foreign Secretary commit to stand by Ukraine steadfast, even when others do not? In his meetings in Washington tomorrow, will he ensure that he points out the folly and the danger of the US Administration’s new approach to Russia?

• 21 Jan 2025 · Official Development Assistance · Hansard source

  More

  Given that the Office for Budget Responsibility forecasts that the fiscal test of returning to 0.7% will not be met in this Parliament, and that there has been no equivalent uplift to the £2.5 billion that the Conservatives put to spend on in-country refugee costs, are the Minister and this Labour Government content to have presided over a real-terms cut to the ODA budget compared with the previous Conservative Government?

• 18 Dec 2024 · Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and International Committee of the Red Cross (Status) Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you for your forbearance, Madam Deputy Speaker. I apologise for my hasty entry into the Chamber, which does not detract from the high importance that the Liberal Democrats and I attach to this Bill. I am pleased to welcome the Bill back to the House on Third Reading and, having listened to hon. Members over the past weeks, I acknowledge the reservoir of support across the House for both the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and the International Committee of the Red Cross. On the Liberal Democrat Benches, we want to see Britain deepening trust and building partnerships with our allies; we want to see Britain setting an example in its support for international humanitarian law; and we want to see Britain countering the rise in global authoritarianism through our commitment to institutions such as the Commonwealth. Set against the scale of these ambitions, the changes made by this Bill may seem comparatively narrow. They are, however, no less important. By altering the status of the CPA and the ICRC so they can be treated as international organisations, with associated privileges and immunities, we will safeguard the critical missions of both bodies while ensuring they can retain their particular relationships with the United Kingdom. In the case of the CPA, the importance of this is readily apparent. The CPA’s present designation as a UK charity limits its participation in the work of the Commonwealth to that of a civil society organisation and fails to respect the spirit of co-operation and voluntary association that animates the Commonwealth. This Bill is an opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to the Commonwealth and to continue hosting the CPA’s headquarters here in the United Kingdom. The Commonwealth charter, signed by the late Queen Elizabeth II, lays out the 16 core values and principles of the Commonwealth. These include democracy, human rights, gender equality, protecting the environment, and the rule of law. These are all principles and values that the Liberal Democrats are pleased to champion. I turn now to the International Committee of the Red Cross and its thousands of dedicated employees who, along with millions of volunteers in national and international Red Cross and Red Crescent societies, comprise the rest of the broader Red Cross and Red Crescent movement. The ICRC is an organisation without parallel. Its unique mandate is an exclusively humanitarian one: to protect the lives and dignity of victims of armed conflict and other situations of violence, and to promote and strengthen humanitarian law. I am sad to say that the ICRC’s mission is as indispensable now as it was at the committee’s founding in 1863 and when it was affirmed by the Geneva conventions in 1949. Today the world is racked by more than 120 armed conflicts. In Sudan, Ukraine, Gaza and across the wider world, millions have been made refugees and tens of millions have been internally displaced. The UN estimates that 87% of the casualties resulting from recent hostilities have been civilians. Aid workers, such as those in the Red Cross and Red Crescent movement, are increasingly at risk, and even news welcomed by this House, such as the fall of the brutal Assad regime, is accompanied by urgent humanitarian need. Since the beginning of the war in Syria in 2011, the ICRC has registered more than 35,000 cases of people who have gone missing. Now, with Assad’s prisons finally cast open, the ICRC has been working to reunite families and to support ex-prisoners. In Sudan, where some 25 million people are in urgent need of humanitarian aid, the shameful Russian veto of the UN Security Council resolution drafted by the UK and Sierra Leone, which called on both the Rapid Support Forces and the Sudanese armed forces to increase aid access, must now encourage the Government to redouble their efforts to see humanitarian law upheld. Since the beginning of the conflict in Gaza, the ICRC has facilitated the release, transfer and return to their loved ones of 109 Israeli hostages held in Gaza. The committee also performed the same function for 154 freed Palestinian detainees. Presently, the ICRC has been denied access to the hostages even now held by Hamas in Gaza, as well as to the Palestinians in Israeli detention. The ICRC therefore has no assurance that either the hostages or the detainees are receiving humane treatment, nutrition or healthcare. Will the Minister affirm that the ICRC must be given immediate access to the hostages in Gaza and to the detainees in Israel and the occupied territories to fulfil its mandate under the third Geneva convention? Will he also inform the House of what actions the Department is taking to ensure combatants adhere to their obligations under international humanitarian law to treat prisoners and detainees humanely? By treating the ICRC as an international organisation, we can provide it with a legal basis to protect its neutrality and continue its work in the world’s most dangerous and fraught regions, and that will be a positive step. However, we must also recognise that while changes to the ICRC’s status are necessary, they are far from sufficient to ensure that humanitarian law is upheld and humanitarian aid is delivered where, when and in the quantities that it is needed. I urge the Government to stand up to the permissive attitude in international law that we witness today in many war zones, affirm our shared values in support of international humanitarian law and impress upon warring factions the need to deliver aid without interference. I am glad that the FCDO’s support to the ICRC this year looks likely to exceed the £133 million provided last year. However, I remain concerned that the cuts to the UK’s international development spending from 0.58% of gross national income to 0.5%, announced in the Budget, will be reflected in reduced support to the ICRC in 2025 and beyond. At this dangerous time, when support for humanitarian aid organisations is so critical, I hope the Government will commit to increasing the funding next year for the ICRC and the indispensable work it does. We Liberal Democrats come from a long tradition of liberal internationalism, which prizes co-operation based on shared values. The efforts of both the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and the International Committee of the Red Cross is of vital importance. We are proud to support them and proud to support the Bill.

• 16 Dec 2024 · Israel and Palestine · Hansard source

  More

  I support my hon. Friend and pay tribute to her work. I agree with her. Let me turn to the second petition, on immediately revoking all arms export licences to Israel. I fully support that proposal, which my party has been calling on the UK Government to implement since April. Tougher controls on UK arms exports are vital to ensure that those arms are not used in potential human rights breaches. I support the introduction of a presumption of denial for all Governments listed in the FCDO’s “Human Rights and Democracy” report as human rights priorities. As a result, arms exports to Israel should be halted. The Minister has long avoided responding to calls from my colleagues for clarity on the UK’s position on ceasing all arms exports to Israel, so I hope we will hear a clearer response from him today.

• 2 Dec 2024 · Bangladesh: Attacks on Hindu Community · Hansard source

  More

  We share the concerns of Members on both sides of the House about these attacks. I note that the Minister has spoken to her Bangladeshi counterparts, and urge her to continue to do so. The most recent Foreign Office human rights and democracy report lists Bangladesh as a “human rights priority” country and highlights “reports of harassment...particularly towards...Hindu minorities, often incited online.” The report recognises that “UK funding through civil society organisations supported freedom of religion or belief and community mediation processes”. Can the Minister update us on the progress being made, using UK funding, in combating religious discrimination in Bangladesh? Is that funding at risk of being another casualty of the latest round of cuts in overseas development assistance? Will the Government support our call for an ambassador-level champion of freedom of religion or belief, so that the UK can do more to ensure that the rights of Hindus and all religious minorities are protected and upheld?

• 13 Nov 2024 · Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and International Committee of the Red Cross (Status) Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  The Bill provides for international organisation status to be conferred on the CPA. It has promoted and strengthened parliamentary democracy since its establishment in 1911, and it facilitates mutual dialogue and learning. The diversity of experience across the 53 Commonwealth countries provides numerous opportunities for us to learn from one another in our shared aspiration of good parliamentary governance. Good governance is ever-moving and our aim should be that it is ever-improving. We support enhancing the status of the CPA by granting it the required protections and immunities, with new status as an international inter-parliamentary organisation. The Liberal Democrats are pleased to welcome the Bill, which we hope will simplify the challenges that the CPA faces in its work across the world, and keep both institutions secure in the UK. We are proud of their work, and the Bill is testament to our shared commitment to them.

• 23 Oct 2024 · Water Companies: Regulation and Financial Stability · Hansard source

  More

  Esher and Walton is a river community. The Thames borders our constituency, and the River Mole, which is a chalk stream, runs through it. The River Mole is one of the most polluted rivers in the country, and a quarter of the sewage poured into is from my constituency. This amounts to a failure that impacts on our health, our environment and our democracy. Why our democracy? Because it means the public believe that our Government turn a blind eye to this outrage and the ransacking of our public utility, therefore neither representing them nor serving their interests. Does my hon. Friend agree that this must not be allowed to happen again, and that we—and the new Government in particular—must deliver clean rivers and get this right?

• 22 Oct 2024 · Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and International Committee of the Red Cross (Status) Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  I am pleased to welcome the Bill and support the recognition of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and the International Committee of the Red Cross as international organisations. As liberals we are internationalists, and the Bill fits with Liberal Democrat policies of international co-operation and the upholding of international humanitarian law by supporting the strengthening of international bodies and organisations that seek to forward those aims. Anything that can be done in this fragile global environment to strengthen global collaboration is something that we must support. Treating these organisations as international bodies would be a testament to the House’s shared commitment to international humanitarian law—which we want to be practised even in the most fraught zones of conflict—and our commitment to good governance and its promotion in the world. The International Committee of the Red Cross is an independent body that plays a crucial role in protecting civilian lives in the midst of conflict and war zones. Today, when there are more than 120 ongoing armed conflicts in the world, its work is needed more than ever. It has been active over the last year in Ukraine, helping to ensure that over 4 million people have had access to water, heat and electricity. It has worked in Sudan distributing food assistance to more than 42,000 people and helping with water purification, benefiting more than 2 million people. In Gaza, it has been supporting basic needs and medical equipment. It has engaged the parties of the conflict and reminded them of their responsibilities under international humanitarian law, and has worked to facilitate the release, transfer and return of hostages and detainees from both sides. It is important that we strengthen its ability to do this work without fear. The new designation merely means that we are catching up with many of our peer nations: more than 110 states have now granted the ICRC relevant privileges and immunities—including every other member of the UN Security Council—in recognition of its unique mandate, which demands above all that it be allowed to maintain its neutrality. The ICRC’s history is singularly bound up with the history of the Geneva conventions. It persuaded Governments to adopt the first and original Geneva convention 160 years ago this year. That treaty obliged armies to care for wounded soldiers, whatever side they were on, and introduced the red cross on the white background—the unifying emblem for medical services for any and every side, across borders and enemy lines. The committee’s remit expanded alongside the successive Geneva conventions, and in 1949 expanded to include civilians. I am sure Members will acknowledge, given current conflicts, that the ICRC’s obligation to civilians is as essential now as it was 75 years ago; indeed, in 2022 the UN estimated that 87% of casualties resulting from hostilities were civilians. In such zones, the ICRC is often almost alone among agencies in co-ordinating and delivering aid at scale, and, crucially, in having lines of communication with belligerents. For these reasons, the FCDO refers to the ICRC as an “essential partner” for achieving the UK’s humanitarian goals, as well as our wish to see international humanitarian law upheld. Liberal Democrats believe in the universal conceptions of civilian rights asserted by the fourth Geneva convention and the additional protocols. In working across conflict zones with non-combatants—with prisoners, hostages and the wounded—the ICRC acts as a guardian of international humanitarian law. That status is possible only because the committee is understood to be neutral, applying universal rather than partisan principles. The privileges and immunities laid out in the Bill include inviolability for its archives and premises, which will assure parties to conflict of the confidentiality of its information and its independence. They also include the testimonial and narrow criminal immunities that will permit the ICRC’s staff to maintain the necessary conversations with proscribed groups, without which their most challenging work would not be possible. Neglecting to take these steps risks threatening the fundamental mission of the ICRC at a time when it is needed more than ever. As part of its mandate, the committee is in the vanguard of clarifying and developing international humanitarian law. Sadly, there has been an increase in permissive interpretations of IHL, and without the ICRC’s perspective and experience, the analyses through which we protect those caught in conflict zones would be poorer. The Bill also provides for international organisation status to be conferred on the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, which is made up of 180 Commonwealth legislatures from 53 Commonwealth countries. As other Members have pointed out, this seems a particularly fitting moment for the Bill to reach the House, given that leaders are now gathering in Samoa for the 27th Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting. The Commonwealth is a rare organisation, being a voluntary association of states bound not by economic or security ties, but by shared values and, even more, by shared aspirations. As the instrument through which aspirations and values are pursued, the constitution of the CPA upholds shared principles of democracy, development, equality, human rights and environmental protections. The CPA has promoted and strengthened parliamentary democracy since its establishment in 1911, and it allows for parliamentarians from across the Commonwealth to engage in dialogue and learn from each other. We support enhancing the status of the CPA by granting it protections and immunities that are comparable to those of the Commonwealth Foundation and the Commonwealth of Learning. In 2006, the CPA published its benchmarks—87 indicators against which parliamentary democracies can be measured. These were updated in 2018 to include the UN’s sustainable development goals, which chimes with the Liberal Democrats’ manifesto commitment to put the SDGs at the heart of our international development policy. Although we were disappointed that the Labour party’s manifesto did not mention the SDGs, we have been encouraged by the fact that they were referenced in the Chatham House speech given by the Minister for Development last week. I hope that Members of all parties are united in our commitment to the SDGs. The Commonwealth includes both the world’s most populous democracy and its least populous. Since 2018, 33 jurisdictions have undertaken assessments using the CPA criteria, and many have subsequently participated in technical assistance programmes—multi-year programmes that are focused on strengthening institutions and building parliamentary capacity. With its new status as an international inter-parliamentary organisation, the CPA will be enabled to sign the international agreements that it has been prevented from signing, hold Commonwealth Governments to account for actions against parliamentarians, provide member Parliaments with better governance, and participate fully in Commonwealth work, including at CHOGM. I am glad that the House is considering this Bill, which is designed to support the work of the CPA and the ICRC by designating them as international organisations. This step will simplify the challenges that they both face in working so widely across the globe as essential vehicles for the delivery of international humanitarian aid and democracy, which is never more needed than now. It will underscore our commitment to the Commonwealth, keep the CPA headquartered in the UK and ensure that the ICRC remains secure in the UK. Anything that this House can do to ease the execution of their work, which has such noble aims, should be jumped at, and the Liberal Democrats support this Bill.

• 16 Oct 2024 · Access to Primary Healthcare · Hansard source

  More

  I am proud to speak today about our NHS, which looks after my constituents in Esher and Walton—young, old and in the middle—every day. But after years of neglect and failure by the previous Government, my constituents too often struggle to access primary healthcare, which we believe should be a right. The NHS was denied necessary reforms and resources, and it has not been prepared for an ageing population with increasing rates of chronic and complex conditions. The extra strain is demonstrated in the ratio of patients per GP and in the daily lives of my constituents, who suffer long waits or are unable to get appointments. I recently received a letter describing how a GP appointment for a constituent’s elderly mother was cancelled at short notice and had not been rescheduled after a month, despite several emails. Problems like this are far from being one-offs. In my constituency, residents often struggle to get same-day GP appointments, and too many wait more than a week. Our personal citizen contract with the NHS is implicit in being British, but that contract is fraying. Being able to access a GP in a timely manner is an essential expectation that my constituents still have, which is why enshrining the Liberal Democrat guarantee of access to an appointment within seven days as a right in the NHS’s constitution is so important. It reflects the duty of the Government to ensure that one’s local GP is always accessible. The excessive wait times are intimately connected with the Conservative failure to recruit and retain GPs. In the previous Government’s 2019 manifesto, they committed to recruit more than 6,000 GPs; instead, there are fewer GPs than there were five years ago. Since then, however, the population has continued to rise and age, and conditions have become more complex. The broken Conservative promise—yet another failure—means that in the last eight years, the number of patients per fully qualified GP in the Surrey heartlands has risen to 2,163, even though the UK has one of the lowest ratios of doctors to people, recently ranking 22nd out of 33 OECD countries. Even when people can get an appointment, it is often not with a GP, often unknowingly. As my hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) pointed out, the policies pursued by the previous Government, including the restrictions on the recruitment of GPs under the additional roles recruitment scheme, have resulted in incidents of GPs in Esher and Walton being offered voluntary redundancy, even as residents struggle to get an appointment. Our most vulnerable patients have a particular need for security and stability, and this belief under- pins the Lib Dem conviction that everyone over the age of 70 or with a long-term physical or mental health condition—

• 10 Oct 2024 · Gaza and Humanitarian Aid · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. I congratulate the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan) on securing the debate on this most critical issue. This is my first contribution in my capacity as Liberal Democrat spokesperson for international development, and this is a hugely pressing issue. Hon. Members have spoken of the many aid agencies working in incredibly difficult situations and risking their lives. I want to add my voice to the tributes paid to them. Liberal Democrats share the calls we have heard today for an immediate recognition of a Palestinian state and urge the Government to use every lever they have to de-escalate the conflict. Conflict is escalating in the middle east. We are on the brink of a regional war, which would be of devastating consequence to innocent civilians, be they Palestinian, Lebanese, Israeli or Iranian. We now face a second humanitarian crisis in the region in Lebanon, where hundreds of thousands are already displaced in addition to the many Syrian refugees already living in Lebanon. We cannot afford for Lebanon to become a failed state. We welcome the increase in aid to Lebanon of £10 million but, frankly, that is a drop in the ocean. As recently as 2019-20, the UK ODA allocation to Lebanon was over £200 million. This year we are looking at less than £20 million. Amidst the tensions in the region, we cannot and must not forget Gaza. The Liberal Democrats continue to call for an immediate bilateral ceasefire in Gaza to resolve the humanitarian devastation there, get the hostages out and open the door to a two-state solution. There is clearly a dire humanitarian need in the strip. Amidst an escalation of the conflict in the region, the flow of essential goods into Gaza has been critically restricted, causing a drop in aid supplies and a critical shortage of commercial goods. Aid entering Gaza has plummeted to its lowest level in months. If the flow of assistance does not resume, more than 1 million vulnerable people will lose the assistance they rely on in October. Three quarters of Gaza’s population rely on food aid to survive. People have run out of ways to cope, food systems have collapsed and the risk of famine persists. The World Health Organisation is now looking to carry out the second phase of a polio inoculation campaign after the first case of polio in Gaza in 25 years was found over the summer. First, we call on the UK Government to increase humanitarian support to Gaza. The Liberal Democrats have long urged the Government to restore the 0.7% of national income target for international development spending—indeed, when in government, we enshrined that target in law. Now that the aid budget has been so depleted, we face humanitarian crises such as these with one hand tied behind our back. We continue to urge the Government to look again at returning to 0.7%. There are also specific problems with getting aid into Gaza. Not enough humanitarian aid is getting into the strip, and the Rafah crossing is shut. I hope that the Minister will provide an update on what exchanges he and his counterparts have had with all relevant agencies, in particular with the Israeli Government, to ensure that aid is stepped up. Secondly, we know that there are particular problems with the distribution of aid in Gaza, with no deconfliction system in place. We have heard about how aid entering into one part of the strip does not get to its intended destination, because human need is so great along the way. Will the Minister update us on what work the FCDO is doing to try to make it easier and safer for aid to be distributed in a manner that protects the safety of aid workers? Thirdly, we are now moving into the winter months, and as the temperatures drop they pose particular challenges to the humanitarian situation in the strip. It is vital that we act now and quickly with our allies to do all we can to ensure that we can support Gazans through these winter months and beyond. Will the Minister update us on what steps he and his ministerial colleagues are taking to that end? Fourthly, the Liberal Democrats welcome the Government’s decision to once again provide UK ODA to UNRWA. Will the Minister update us on what conversations he has had with counterparts in UNRWA, including on the implementation of the Colonna report? It is vital that these recommendations are implemented as soon as possible, thereby ensuring that all work to support Palestinians in Gaza is of the highest possible standards and integrity. Finally, looking across from Gaza into the west bank, will the Minister update us on the level of UK ODA being provided to support the Palestinian Authority? Supporting the Palestinian Authority and improving wider conditions for Palestinians is absolutely vital at this difficult moment.