Monica Harding MP: speeches

Speeches

• 14 Sept 2026 · Israel and Palestine · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is absolutely right that America has a critical role to play in this conflict. To give some numbers, as of 6 August, at least 300 children have reportedly been killed in Gaza in the 300 days since the ceasefire was announced—an average of one child a day. Gazans continue to remain in the grip of a man-made humanitarian catastrophe in the strip. The UK Government must do more to alleviate the humanitarian crises there and the one growing in the west bank. Over 2 million people in Gaza are living on around 30% of the territory, sheltering in unsafe conditions among destroyed buildings, rubble and waste. Some 70% of Gaza remains under IDF control. The UK must now apply genuine pressure to Netanyahu’s Government to ensure that food, aid, medical supplies and other essentials can reach Gazans now, without impediment and under the auspices of the UN, and that children and all civilians are protected. I have called on UK Ministers to pressure Netanyahu’s Government to lift their arbitrary restrictions on non-governmental organisations supplying humanitarian aid to the strip. Last week, I noted in this Chamber that more than 1.4 million people in Gaza are acutely food insecure, yet Israel’s current interpretation of dual-use restrictions means that Palestinians are routinely and systematically denied essential items, including those needed for rehabilitation by the tens of thousands of people who have suffered life-changing injuries during this conflict. The Foreign Secretary agreed that blocking those goods was appalling and seemed to suggest that it was a strategy. What does the Minister think is the strategy of the Israeli Government? Will he put pressure on them to undo those dual-good restrictions to allow the Palestinians to be self-sufficient, and to ensure that aid is sustainable and that they are no longer expected to live hand to mouth? From October, the World Food Programme will cut the number of people it can feed in Gaza from 1.1 million to 600,000—not because the need has reduced, but because the money has run out. Those are people who will go without food, in a territory where 100,000 women and children are already expected to need treatment for malnutrition in the coming year. The UK is the ninth-largest donor to World Food Programme operations in Palestine, behind the USA, Germany and France. Our annual contribution fell from $18 million in 2024 to $9.3 million last year, and to just $4 million this year. That is a reduction of 78%. The Government cannot truly speak of their commitment to the Palestinian people while presiding over cuts like those. Will the Minister explain how those two things are reconcilable? The brutal cuts to our aid budget have meant that our response to all humanitarian crises is limited. I have asked many Ministers in this House when we should expect at the very least a road map for restoring the 0.7% aid budget—a commitment that we in this House have enshrined in law. Again, can the Minister set out that timeline? Can he confirm that his party—the party of the Department for International Development and making poverty history—is committed to seeing our aid budget returned in full?

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way; he has been very generous with his time. We are being asked to believe that the solution is more complex restructuring, borrowing, negotiations and concessions. However, according to recent reporting, Thames Water will have incurred almost £2 billion in financing costs and restructuring fees over the last 18 months. Meanwhile, my constituents’ bills are going up. Does he think that is fair?

• 8 Sept 2026 · Conflict in Sudan · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank the hon. Member for Gillingham and Rainham (Naushabah Khan) for raising the subject, which we should be talking about much more, and welcome the Minister to her place. I declare my interest as vice-chair of the APPG for Sudan and South Sudan, and I refer to a trip undertaken with Action Against Hunger to the Chad-Sudan border to witness the impact of the conflict. I can rehearse the lines I have said over and over again during my time in the House to a range of Ministers: the world has failed Sudan, and the UK must do much more to bring about an end to the conflict and to the largest humanitarian crisis in the world today. In June, with the leader of my party, my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey), I wrote to the former Prime Minister urging him to use his last hours in office to act to end the escalating crisis in El Obeid, which is at real risk of levels of violence against civilians similar to the El Fasher massacre in 2025. I did not receive a response. Over the summer, El Obeid has seen thousands of people arriving in search of shelter. Foreign Ministers, including here in the UK, have made welcome statements calling for de-escalation and for the warring parties to uphold international humanitarian law, but the situation there continues to worsen. It is emblematic of the situation in Sudan today. In May, colleagues and I visited Chad’s border with Sudan. We found a humanitarian response operating under extraordinary pressure. The town of Adré, which once had a population of 40,000, now hosts an estimated 240,000 people. Chad now hosts more than 1.5 million refugees, the majority of them from Sudan. Chad is one of the poorest countries in the world and is sharing scarce water, land and services with a vast refugee population. But as the humanitarian actors we met on our trip told us continually, the needs far outweigh the resources they have to respond.

• 1 Sept 2026 · Climate Change: National Security · Hansard source

  More

  May I put on record that the Liberal Democrats’ concern and thoughts are with the people of Nepal and Tibet as this tragedy unfolds? I urge the Government to stay the distance with them. The UK’s spend on international aid and development aids our national security not only in climate change but in keeping extremism, pandemics and illegal immigration from our shores, but the Government have slashed aid brutally, and the true impact of the cuts was finally realised only in the final hours before summer recess. The cuts are deep and worrying. Will this Administration reverse them? Will the Secretary of State set out a timeline for when UK aid will return to 0.7% of GNI—a commitment that the House legislated for?

• 7 Jul 2026 · UK Aid Policy: Global Funding Trends · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Efford. I pay tribute to the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) for securing this debate, because we rarely talk about this subject in the Chamber. The Government do not seem to want to talk about aid and development very much, but they must and they should, because our world is on fire, because cuts to development make it worse and because it is within the British national interest to support it. I am sure that, if my party had cut the aid budget that far, I would not want to talk about it either. The deplorable aid cuts, from a proud 0.7% to 0.3% —the biggest cuts to aid this century, amounting to a 50% cut in bilateral aid to Africa alone—are in danger of stripping the UK of much of its proud reputation on the global stage. I must note at this point that, despite continual prompting from members of the International Development Committee, of which I am one, the Government are still yet to publish their country allocations of aid, which makes it very difficult to scrutinise the damage. However, we do know, and the Government know, that these cuts will cost lives. Combined with those caused by the collapse of USAID—the United States Agency for International Development—the lives lost will likely be in their millions. That includes in countries where we have a legacy, such as Afghanistan, where 45% of the population needs humanitarian assistance and which is no longer prioritised within the UK’s aid budget. In 2022, we contributed $488 million; today, it is $32 million. We have also heard how global aid cuts have caused such damage to health systems in the DRC that the response to tackling the Ebola crisis has been made significantly harder. I know the personal commitment of many Members in this room, and of the Minister, but this is where we are: the party of DFID and Make Poverty History has become a Government of aid cuts so extreme that they outstrip the Trump Administration in their brutality. A Labour Government who followed Donald Trump in cutting aid have outdone him—a Labour Government whose legacy in development, just two years into their Administration, is already far worse than the Conservatives’. Yet once there was consensus. I agree with the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir Andrew Mitchell) on almost everything he said but particularly on leadership. It comes to a pretty pass when a Conservative Member urges Labour Members to rise up and be radical. He said that he had the best job in the world as Development Minister. The British did the best job in the world in development. There was consensus. Building on the work of the previous Labour Government, the coalition Government delivered the commitment to spend 0.7% of gross national income on development, which had been a Liberal Democrat manifesto promise since the 1970s. In coalition, we reached the UN aid target and NATO’s defence spending target at the same time, proving that investment in development and defence are not mutually exclusive; in fact, as we have heard, they are complementary. As I and others have said, defence, diplomacy and development support each other and strengthen any coherent foreign policy. We have heard from some of the UK’s most senior former military chiefs that reducing development capacity today stores up greater instability, greater cost and greater risk for tomorrow. That means more defence spend down the line, and look how we are scrabbling about for it now. Development brings benefits to Britain. It is strategic, and mutually beneficial because investing in peacebuilding, prosperity and stability keeps us safe here too. Take guarding against another pandemic. Covid was not so long ago, and we are told with certainty that there will be another one. Given all the pandemic’s death, its destruction of economies and its long tail of social and mental health challenges, I am sure that many hon. Friends will share my dismay at the decision by the Government to discontinue funding the Pandemic Fund. What about climate change? When harvests fail through drought or flooding, malnutrition sets in, communities fight for pasture and people migrate. In May, the Government broke their pledge on the Green Climate Fund by announcing a cut of 50%, while their new international climate finance target of over £6 billion of public money, which I note is committed over three rather than five years, also seems to be a reduction.