Extract from
PMQs
(Paisley and Renfrewshire
South) (SNP): I join in wishing the Jewish community a happy
Passover and sending my condolences to the family and loved ones
of .
Two years ago, when mass graves were discovered in Ukraine, this
House united in condemnation and rightly treated those graves as
evidence of war crimes, which Russia must be made to answer for.
Yesterday, Palestinian officials uncovered two mass graves
outside the bombed hospitals in Gaza. Those graves also
constitute a war crime, do they not?
The Deputy Prime Minister: Of course, we would expect the
democratic Government of Israel to investigate
any allegations of misconduct. That is exactly what they are
doing, and it is exactly what the Foreign Secretary and the Prime
Minister urge them to do. However, I find it quite extraordinary
that the hon. Lady seeks to draw parallels between the legitimate
war of self-defence of Israel and the conduct
of Russia.
: Three hundred bodies,
including of the elderly and the injured, some of which had been
stripped naked and mutilated, with their hands tied behind their
backs. The UK's own arms policy states that if there is even a
risk that war crimes may be taking place, that is reason enough
to halt the sale of arms. Given all that we know, why is the
Prime Minister yet to do so?
The Deputy Prime Minister: We continue to urge the Israeli
Government to investigate any allegations of misconduct. The
difference though is that we can trust the Israeli Government—a
democratically elected Government—to properly investigate those
things. Of course, we keep the advice under review. The Foreign
Secretary has recently made it clear that he has conducted a
determination and has not changed his advice regarding export
licences, and I think that is the correct decision.
Point of Order
(Leeds East) (Lab): On a
point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. The House has been
receiving information about the Government's ongoing arms exports
to Israel about which the
Deputy Prime Minister spoke earlier. A High Court hearing on a
judicial review into arms exports, which finished yesterday,
provided lots of information that—I will say this politely—is far
from the impression we have been given by Ministers about arms
sales, especially about how we have the most robust arms export
licences in the world. One such example is that although the
Government last reviewed and approved arms sales to Israel on 8 April, it
appears that that did not consider the killing of three British
aid workers in Israeli air strikes on Gaza on 1 April. I think we
all find that shocking. Madam Deputy Speaker, can you advise how
we ensure the Government are providing this House with up-to-date
and accurate information, and how we can best hold the Government
to account over this pressing and serious matter?
Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame ): I thank the hon.
Gentleman for his point of order and for giving me notice of it.
I think he will be interested to know that Ministers were giving
evidence to the Business and Trade Committee on this subject
earlier today. In view of that, I am sure that he will find a way
to ask Ministers about any new information that may have come to
light since they last answered questions on this subject in the
Chamber. I should also say that the Secretary of State for
Defence has stayed to listen to his point of order, and I am sure
that the Treasury Bench will feed back the points that he has
made.
Extract from Commons
debate to approve the draft Terrorism Act 2000 (Proscribed
Organisations) (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 2024
The Minister for Security ():...Terrorgram holds vile antisemitic views. It has
published propaganda material aimed at inciting violence against
Jewish communities and the state of Israel and, most
recently, celebrated Hamas's attacks on Israel
including endorsing the use of terrorism to target Israel and Jewish
communities. Reporting indicates that Terrorgram has advocated
for attacks on Israel's critical national infrastructure. This
proscription further demonstrates our unwavering commitment to
fighting antisemitism and our unfaltering support for the Jewish
community...
(Strangford) (DUP):...The Minister's announcement
that the UK is the first country in the world to proscribe the
Terrorgram collective is positive, and proactive by him and the
Government. This group spreads vile propaganda, with evil—indeed,
murderous—intent, and there is absolutely no place for it in
modern society. The Minister rightly reminded the House, and
myself in particular, that the group is anti-Israel and
anti-Jewish. Terrorgram's hatred of Israel and the Jewish
people is to be condemned unreservedly. I commend the Minister on
the Government's response and their support of Israel within the law,
which they have given the whole way through. On this issue, the
response is critical. I was a friend of Israel when I was in
the Northern Ireland Assembly some 14 years ago—I was there for
12 years—and I have been a friend of Israel here. I
am therefore encouraged by the Minister's comments in relation to
the support that he has given the Israeli people and the Jewish
people in the face of downright hatred. The Terrorgram collective
must be proscribed, and it must be made criminally impossible for
them to operate in any fashion, so today's announcement is good
news...
To read the whole debate, OPEN HERE
Family Reunion Visas:
Gaza
Asked by
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to
assist family reunion under the existing visa rules for persons
in Gaza.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office () (Con)
My Lords, in any humanitarian situation, the UK must consider its
resettlement approach in the round, rather than on a
crisis-by-crisis basis. We use existing pathways in response to
events to support British nationals, those settled here and their
family members. At present, there are no plans to create a new
immigration route for those affected by the security
situation.
(Lab)
There are Palestinian families here who would urgently like
family reunion with their relatives in Gaza on a temporary basis,
perhaps modelled on the Ukrainian scheme. People are in real
difficulties. Would the Minister care to comment on this? People
in Gaza cannot apply for a family reunion visa to join family in
the UK without leaving Gaza—but they cannot leave Gaza without a
visa. Surely we can do better than that.
(Con)
My Lords, the safety of all British nationals affected by the
conflict in Gaza continues to be our utmost priority, but
individuals who are not British nationals should apply for a visa
to enable them to enter the UK in the normal way—and of course
much of the process is online. Individuals who are not British
citizens must not travel to the UK without existing permission to
enter or remain previously agreed.
(Con)
My Lords, under the Ukrainian scheme, about 174,000 people came
to the UK, and there were extensive categories of family
relationships under that scheme. Can my noble friend the Minister
outline whether the same categories apply for this family
reunification scheme—and, if not, why not?
(Con)
The Ukraine family scheme was a temporary visa approach rather
than a refugee scheme. It is not a route to permanent
resettlement; it formed part of the response that we made with
other countries to the Russian Government's unprovoked war
against Ukraine. The Ukraine family scheme was developed in close
consultation with the Government of Ukraine, who have been very
clear that they would like their citizens to return to Ukraine
when it is safe to do so. Obviously, similar discussions with the
Government in Gaza would not be possible, so the two situations
are not analogous.
(Lab)
My Lords, how many people does the Minister think are online in
Gaza to make such an application?
(Con)
I am afraid that I am not terribly familiar with the internet in
Gaza.
(LD)
Is the Minister aware that the immigration tribunal judges found
the Home Office's decision on this to be “irrational”? The
concern is even deeper: the Home Office found itself able to
expand the situation for those in Hong Kong who were under fear
of persecution, but those who are in Gaza, who are in fear for
their lives, the Home Office seems to be completely silent about.
Therefore, there is a concern about double standards. Given the
requirement on the occupying power, the Government
of Israel to ensure
facilitation of the very documentation that the Minister said is
necessary, what discussions has the Home Office had with its
interlocutors in the Israeli Government to ensure that the visa
process for documentation is facilitated?
(Con)
I might dispute the noble Lord's premise there: I am not sure
that I would characterise it as an occupying power. I reiterate
what I said earlier: British nationals and those family members
can obviously apply using normal routes.
(CB)
My Lords, has the Minister made an assessment on how many
students from Gaza studying here in the UK cannot go back to
their homes because their homes have been obliterated? What
financial and other support has been provided to those
students?
(Con)
I am afraid that I really do not have those statistics at hand,
but I shall see if they exist.
(CB)
I wonder whether I could interrupt the Question to pay a very
brief tribute to . He was a man of
the highest integrity, and MP for Birkenhead for many years—but
it is his work on modern slavery that I refer to. He was
responsible, with my help and that of the noble Lord, , for persuading Prime Minister
to have the Modern Slavery Act.
He was the chairman of a small group, including me, which
reviewed the work of that Act. He will go down in history as a
great MP—he was only here briefly, unfortunately, through ill
health—and a man who did a great deal on modern slavery.
(Lab)
Can I draw the Minister's attention to the fact that, in his
opening question, my noble friend specifically used the word
“temporary”, and then prayed in aid the notion of “temporary” in
supporting the Ukraine arrangements. Can the Minister think about
the fact that what was being asked was whether we could find
space in our hearts and systems to allow for family reunion from
Gaza for those people in such dire straits, on a temporary
basis?
(Con)
I take the noble Baroness's point—but, as I say, we keep all
existing pathways in response to events under review.
(Lab)
I join the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, in the
tribute that she made to our noble friend Frank Field—I am sure
that we all join with that.
Judicial review has found that the family of a Palestinian
refugee can apply for a visa without the use of biometrics. The
Home Office has said that it is complying with that, so can the
Minister outline to the Chamber how it is complying, and whether
that applies to all those who should seek a visa application from
Gaza?
(Con)
The noble Lord asks an important question. The judgment was
handed down a couple of weeks ago; obviously, we have received
the outcome and officials will provide advice very shortly to
Ministers on how it will impact ongoing and future
operations.
(Con)
My Lords, I join the comments about Lord Field. He was my first
boss; he paid me £12 a week—I was overpaid. We campaigned for
poverty reform with Ruth Lister— the noble Baroness, Lady
Lister—the noble Baroness, Lady Meacher, Lord Pakenham, and many
others. He was a remarkable man of integrity and persistence, and
quite contrary on occasion, but he made a formidable
difference—and, of course, he was a graduate of the University of
Hull.
(LD)
My Lords, can I revisit an answer that the Minister gave a moment
ago? He said that Israel was not an
occupying power in Gaza. My understanding, by looking at the FCDO
website, is that the British Government's formal position is
that Israel is an occupying
power in Gaza. Could he take this opportunity either to correct
what he said or to explain why the Government have changed their
policy?
(Con)
If I spoke incorrectly, of course I correct it. I have not read
the FCDO advice, but if that is what it says, then I correct the
record.
(CB)
My Lords, I hope the House will forgive me if I follow the
comments of the noble Baroness, Lady Bottomley, about Lord Field.
I worked with for more than 50 years; he
fought more than anybody else I know for people in this country
who are poor and disadvantaged, and they have lost a treasure
with his death yesterday.
of Manor Castle (GP)
My Lords, in responding to the noble Lord, , the Minister referred to the
Government making decisions about special visa schemes on a
crisis-by-crisis basis. What criteria do the Government apply in
making those judgments? Perhaps the Minister can point me to
where it is written down, so that we can all see how the
Government are making them.
(Con)
It very much depends on the circumstances and other factors. For
example, there were separate arrangements made after earthquakes
in places like Turkey and Syria.
(Lab)
My Lords, is not the policy of issuing visas being used
deliberately to cut back the number of immigrants in the
country—particularly those from India—with very severe damage to,
for example, research groups and universities? Could we have an
undertaking that this policy will change?
(Con)
This country is actually very generous: between 2015 and 2023,
some 53,574 family reunion visas were granted to family members.
We are the third most generous country in Europe, after Germany
and Sweden. I do not really know what this Question has to do
with universities.
of Basildon (Lab)
My Lords, in response to an earlier question, the Minister gave a
rather flippant answer when he said that he had no knowledge of
the internet in Gaza. The question was serious; I ask that he
reflects on his response and writes to noble Lords, and puts a
copy in the Library.
(Con)
I disagree. How am I supposed to know how the internet runs in
Gaza? It was not a flippant answer; it is factual.
(Lab)
My Lords, can I press the Government to find the imagination to
help those in Gaza seeking refuge under the most extraordinary,
inhumane circumstances? It would do the Government and this
country a great deal of good if they could reach out and do
something positive.
(Con)
I absolutely take the noble Lord's point, and we keep all systems
and processes under review.
