Naz Shah MP: speeches

Speeches

• 14 Sept 2026 · Israel and Palestine · Hansard source

  More

  I, too, put on the record my thanks to the Minister’s predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), for all the work he has done to get us to this place, and to the Minister and his team for all the work they are doing at the moment, particularly last week. I welcome today’s general debate on Israel and Palestine. It is a timely debate that rightly deserves the attention of the House. There will, no doubt, be a small minority online who will ask why events thousands of miles away should take up time in the British Parliament, so let me address that from the outset. First, Britain does not exist on a planet of its own, detached from the rest of the world. What happens beyond our shores has consequences here at home. We also have a particular historic and moral responsibility when it comes to Israel and Palestine, given the Balfour declaration, the British mandate and our country’s historical role in the region. But even putting that history aside, whether we like it or not, conflicts elsewhere affect the lives of people right here in Britain. A war in Ukraine, a war involving Iran or instability across the middle east can mean higher prices at the petrol pump, higher energy bills, greater inflationary pressures and, ultimately, higher borrowing costs for families. More fundamentally, growing instability around the world threatens the peace, security and freedoms upon which all our lives depend. Britain therefore has both an interest and a responsibility in seeking peace, upholding international law and preventing further conflict. Secondly, we cannot discuss this conflict without confronting the extraordinary loss of human life. According to figures published by the United Nations, more than 73,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza since 7 October 2023. More than 21,700 of those killed have been children—21,700 children.

• 14 Sept 2026 · Israel and Palestine · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes his point strongly, and I was coming on to reference China. If the intention of sanctioning me was to silence me, it will not work. Israel cannot call itself the only democracy in the middle east and then sanction British parliamentarians for speaking out. China previously sanctioned Members of this Parliament for speaking out over human rights abuses in Xinjiang, as my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley (Tahir Ali) pointed out. Those sanctions did not silence British parliamentarians, and nor will these. The justice and equality that I, and many others in this Chamber, fight for does not consider someone’s nationality, faith, ethnic background or who someone is. If more than 73,000 Palestinians are killed in Gaza; if Palestinian land in the occupied west bank is taken through illegal settlements; if Palestinians are being forcibly displaced and subjected to what many international experts and human rights organisations have described as ethnic cleansing; and if the viability of an independent state of Palestine, alongside a state of Israel, is being systematically undermined, eroding every opportunity for a two-state solution and lasting peace in the middle east, then I have a moral duty to speak up. And if innocent Jewish people are murdered, as they were by Hamas in the horrific attacks of 7 October, when around 1,200 people were killed, then I have the same moral duty to speak up and call that out. Outside of this conflict, I have stood shoulder to shoulder with the minority Christian community in Jaranwala in Pakistan against their persecution. The justice that I believe in means that I have a moral duty to stand with them too. Additionally, in response to the Government’s measures to prohibit trade with illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied west bank, the Israeli Government announced that they would close the British consulate general in East Jerusalem. The measures were taken alongside France and Canada, with other international partners also supporting action to protect the two-state solution. Yet Israel chose to direct its retaliation principally against the United Kingdom. That is not the conduct that we should expect from an ally. It looks like an ally lashing out because Britain has chosen to uphold international law. There is also a fundamental question about Israel’s legal authority to take that action. It is not the British embassy in Israel; it is the British consulate general, which represents the United Kingdom in Jerusalem, the west bank and Gaza, and conducts our relations with Palestine. We must see those three areas as one entity, because that is what they are. East Jerusalem is occupied territory. The International Court of Justice has confirmed that Israel holds the status of an occupying power there, and that Israeli sovereignty over East Jerusalem is not internationally recognised. Israel may exercise the practical power to force the consulate’s closure, but practical control is not the same as lawful sovereignty. By what legal right, then, do the Israeli Government seek to close a British diplomatic mission in occupied East Jerusalem? I also want to bring to the House’s attention today’s report by B’Tselem, an Israeli human rights group. It is the most comprehensive report to date on the west bank, gathering evidence from over three decades of Israel’s human rights violations and 2,000 testimonies since October 2023. The report is called “The Elimination Project”. It shows the correlation between the widespread destruction of homes and infrastructure, the network of roadblocks and checkpoints, the attacks by armed settler militias, the expulsion of communities and the unprecedented expansion of settlements, outposts and farms. B’Tselem says that these are not separate phenomena; rather, they are part of an Israeli project to eliminate the Palestinian collective, in order to establish permanent Jewish Israeli control over the entire area. The Israeli elimination project, according to B’Tselem, “did not begin with the current government,” but since late 2022 a new phase has been entered, with faster and much broader deployment. Given that report today, I ask the Minister whether the Government will expedite the measures announced last week—the ban on trade with the occupied west bank and illegally occupied areas. This is really important. The Foreign Secretary made it clear to this House last week that Britain is not powerless when international law is being torn apart. Once again, I commend the Prime Minister and the Government for demonstrating the power of international diplomacy, and for leading action, alongside France, Canada and other international partners, against illegal Israeli settlements and those who profit from them.

• 9 Jul 2026 · Israeli Settlements: Trade Ban · Hansard source

  More

  I want to start by putting on record my thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) for bringing forward this important debate. I congratulate her on her tremendous, very passionate speech. I am grateful to all Members who have outlined the legal position. We know that Ireland has passed a Bill banning products from illegal settlements, as has Spain, and Belgium is pushing to do the same. I am going to bring Members right back to the common-sense argument. The case put forward this week by the Irish Parliament was clear: goods should not enter freely into commercial markets, as doing so would allow illegal goods and services to be transformed into legal entities in Ireland. That is the crux of it for me, and it is that premise that has been highlighted in expert legal opinions by Richard Fisher KC and Rabah Kherbane of Doughty Street Chambers. They say that there is a legal basis under domestic UK law for prosecuting the trade of goods from Israeli illegal settlements into the UK and that it amounts to production under part 7 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. The decision not to ban these products seems driven less by genuine legal application than by how such a position might be politically received by Israel. Fundamentally, the question is not about trade with Israel but about trade with illegal settlements in illegal occupied territories and a matter of international law.