The Prime Minister (Rishi Sunak) Mr Speaker, the whole House will
join me in sending our sympathies to the people of Morocco
following the devastating earthquake. Our thoughts are with those
who have lost loved ones, the injured and those bravely engaged in
rescue efforts. We also remember the victims and loved ones of the
terrorist attacks that took place in the United States 22 years ago
today, including many British citizens. I have just returned from
the G20 summit...Request free trial
The Prime Minister ()
Mr Speaker, the whole House will join me in sending our
sympathies to the people of Morocco following the devastating
earthquake. Our thoughts are with those who have lost loved ones,
the injured and those bravely engaged in rescue efforts. We also
remember the victims and loved ones of the terrorist attacks that
took place in the United States 22 years ago today, including
many British citizens.
I have just returned from the G20 summit in India. For the
record, let me declare that, as is a matter of public record, I
and my family are of Indian origin, and my wife and her family
are Indian citizens with financial interests in India. At the
summit I had three aims: first, to increase diplomatic pressure
on Russia and call out its shameful disruption of global food
supplies in the Black sea; secondly, to show the world that
democracies such as the United Kingdom, not authoritarian
regimes, are leading the fight on global challenges such as
development and climate change; and thirdly, to strengthen ties
and forge new partnerships to deliver jobs, growth and security
for the British people.
The world faces a moment of danger, volatility and increasingly
rapid change, but even as most G20 leaders came together in Delhi
in a spirit of co-operation, one did not. For two years now,
Putin has lacked the courage to face his G20 peers. Day after
day, his actions cause horrendous suffering in Ukraine, violating
the United Nations Charter, threatening European security, and
disrupting global energy supplies. The spill-overs have driven up
prices here at home, and they are hurting people all around the
world. Russia’s withdrawal from the Black sea grain initiative
exposes its willingness to spread that suffering further. While
Putin stalls, making unmeetable demands, he is destroying
Ukraine’s ports and grain silos. In just one month, Russia has
destroyed over 270,000 tonnes of grain—enough to feed 1 million
people for a year. I can tell the House today that, thanks to
declassified intelligence, we know that on 24 August with
multiple missiles the Russian military targeted a civilian cargo
ship in the Black sea, demonstrating just how desperate Putin
is.
At the G20, leaders united in calling out the “human suffering”
caused by Putin’s war. Ukraine has the right to export its goods
through international waters, and it has the moral right to ship
grain that is helping to feed the world. The UK is working with
partners to get grain to those who need it most. We will provide
£3 million for the World Food Programme, building on earlier
contributions to President Zelensky’s “Grain from Ukraine”
initiative. We are using our intelligence, surveillance and
reconnaissance capabilities to monitor Russian activity in the
Black sea, so that we can call it out if we see that Russia is
preparing further attacks on civilian shipping or infrastructure,
and so that we can attribute attacks should they happen. Later
this year, we are hosting a UK global food security summit to put
in place solutions for the long term.
I spoke to my friend President Zelensky just before the summit.
Backed by our support, Ukraine’s counter-offensive is making
hard-won progress. We will continue to stand with Ukraine for as
long as it takes, until we see a “just and durable peace” that
respects its sovereignty and territorial integrity. That is the
only possible outcome to Putin’s illegal war, and Ukraine, with
our support, will prevail.
On my second aim, we showed at the G20 that it is the UK and our
partners, not authoritarian actors, that offer the best solution
to the global challenges we face. We are playing our part to
stabilise the global economy, control inflation, and fuel future
growth. The latest figures from the Office for National
Statistics show the UK is leading the way, growing faster out of
the pandemic than any other major European economy, and
demolishing the false narratives we have heard from the other
side of this House. We are also leading the way on development
assistance. Instead of loading countries with debt, we are
calling for fundamental reforms of the World Bank. When I met the
World Bank president, I underlined the UK’s desire to see the
Bank become more efficient and responsible, sweating its balance
sheet to deliver more support where it is needed.
We are also leading calls at the G20 to safely harness new
technologies to support growth and development, and we are
leading action to tackle climate change. While some in
Westminster denigrate the UK’s record on climate issues, out
there in the world we are rightly seen as a global leader. We
have cut emissions faster than any other G7 country, with
low-carbon sources now providing over half our electricity. We
are providing billions for the global energy transition,
including through our pioneering Just Energy Transition
Partnerships. And at the G20 I made a record commitment of over
£1.6 billion for the Green Climate Fund—the single biggest
international climate pledge that the UK has ever made.
Finally, my most important aim in Delhi was to deliver on the
priorities of the British people. In a changing world, we are
using our Brexit freedoms to build new relationships with
economies around the world. Since I became Prime Minister, we
have joined the comprehensive and progressive agreement for
trans-Pacific partnership—the most dynamic trading bloc in the
world. We have launched new partnerships with Canada, Australia,
Japan and the US, covering trade and economic security. We have
secured agreements with France, Albania, Turkey and others to
stop illegal migration. At the G20, we went further. We signed a
new strategic partnership with Singapore to boost jobs, growth
and our security. I held warm and productive discussions with
Prime Minister Modi on strengthening our relationship in defence
and technology and on a free trade deal between our nations.
I also met Premier Li of China. The whole House is rightly
appalled by reports of espionage in this building. The sanctity
of this place must be protected, and the right of Members to
speak their minds without fear or sanction must be maintained. We
will defend our democracy and our security, so I was emphatic
with Premier Li that actions that seek to undermine British
democracy are completely unacceptable and will never be
tolerated. I also emphasised the UK’s unyielding commitment to
human rights, and I was clear on the importance of maintaining
stability and international law as the basis for stable
relations. China is a permanent member of the UN Security
Council, the world’s second largest economy and the world’s
largest emitter of carbon dioxide. It has growing influence on
others, notably Russia. One of my messages to Premier Li was that
China should use its influence to call on Russia to end its
aggression against Ukraine. The G20 showed a common purpose on
food security, and we need to see that in other areas.
This Government have acted decisively to improve our security,
including blocking China’s involvement in critical areas such as
civil nuclear power, semiconductors and 5G. I pay tribute to the
tireless work of our security services. We will shortly set out
our response to the Intelligence and Security Committee’s report
on China. In November last year, the Government set up a new
defending democracy taskforce. Its mission is to reduce the risk
to the UK’s democratic processes, institutions and society, and
to ensure they are secure and resilient to threats of foreign
interference. The importance of that work is clear for all to
see. Crucially, in taking that approach, we are aligned with each
and every single one of our Five Eyes allies and our G7 partners.
By speaking frankly and directly, we will ensure our messages are
heard clearly and that our interests and values are protected and
promoted.
In conclusion, at a time of rapid change, we are bringing British
values and British leadership to bear on the biggest global
challenges. As one of the fastest growing major economies, the
second largest contributor to NATO and a global leader in
everything from climate to tech to development, I am proud of the
United Kingdom’s leadership. It is through that leadership,
working with our allies and partners, that we will increase our
security, grow our economy and deliver on the priorities of the
British people. I commend this statement to the House.
Mr Speaker
I call the Leader of the Opposition.
4.42pm
(Holborn and St Pancras)
(Lab)
May I thank the Prime Minister for an advance copy of his
statement? I join him in sending my condolences and those of the
whole House to those affected by the devastating earthquake in
Morocco. I know that UK search and rescue specialists are working
to help Moroccan authorities find survivors, and it is important
at this time that all those in Morocco know we are thinking of
them and are prepared to give the resources and support that they
need.
The G20 summit in India was a real opportunity to see progress on
key global issues, by condemning Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine
in no uncertain terms and making solid commitments to boost
growth and renewable energy capacity around the world. I am
afraid therefore that the joint declaration from the weekend is
disappointing. As Russian drones resumed attacks on Kyiv, it is
disheartening to see language weaker than the G20’s condemnation
of Moscow at last year’s summit in Bali. On this issue, the House
speaks with one voice: there is no ambiguity; we all agree that
this is an unjust, illegal war against Ukraine. I join the Prime
Minister in saying that Britain and our NATO allies will remain
committed in helping Ukraine defeat Putin.
On the matter raised in the preceding statement, the news of the
arrest of a researcher here in Parliament on suspicion of spying
for China is a serious breach of security conducted by the
Beijing security services. Given that the arrest happened in
March, can I ask the Prime Minister whether the Foreign Secretary
knew about this incident before he visited China last month? If
he did, did he raise it on that trip? I listened to the answers
given on the preceding statement by the Deputy Prime Minister,
who said that these issues are regularly raised, but my question
is specific, and I ask the Prime Minister to address it directly.
If, as it seems, the Government are not considering designating
China as a threat to national security, will he give further
details on how they will tackle the infiltration of Chinese
security services into key British institutions? Incidents like
this show the constant threats that we face, and the G20 shows
how far we have to go.
There was some important progress at the G20 this weekend: a new
partnership for global infrastructure and investment was
announced between the US, the EU, India and Gulf states. It is a
partnership to counterbalance China’s belt and road initiative,
boost economic department, secure supply chains and connect the
US, EU and trusted partners in Asia. A much welcome initiative,
we might think. So when I looked at the signatories to this new
partnership, I was surprised—something was missing. Where was
Britain? Will the Prime Minister explain why the UK has not
signed this agreement? This seems remarkable. A new agreement has
been reached between major trade blocs to deliver economic
security and Britain is not involved. The Prime Minister owes the
House an explanation. Have we been left out or have we just
decided not to sign? The race towards the future has begun. Major
nations are investing in new technology, hoping to establish
themselves as leaders and major global centres for green
technology. The US has introduced the Inflation Reduction Act;
the EU, in return, is relaxing rules to allow greater green
subsidy. Where is Britain? Where is the plan?
I would also like to ask the Prime Minister about the trade deal
between India and the UK. The Government promised it in their
manifesto. Then they said it would be done by Diwali last year.
Now, the Prime Minister says that the deal is not even
guaranteed. What is going on? It really sums up their global
economic approach: no strategy and no direction. We cannot be
slow off the mark. The race has started. They once promised a new
era of post-Brexit global trade, but instead of more investment
and more trade they have erected unnecessary barriers and made
Britain a more difficult country to do business in. We cannot be
left on the sidelines. Britain needs a seat at the table. We have
the expertise, the creativity and the ingenuity, but the
Government are too distracted and too complacent, and have no
plan to seize the opportunities of the future.
The Prime Minister
Let me rattle through the right hon. and learned Gentleman’s
questions. With regard to the matter covered in the preceding
statement, I am sure he will appreciate that, as there is an
ongoing investigation —as you also said, Mr Speaker—I am limited
in what I can say specifically. But I have been emphatically
clear in our engagement with China that we will not accept any
interference in our democracy and parliamentary system. That
includes the sanctioning of MPs and malign activity such as the
type of activity alleged to have taken place. I can absolutely
confirm that the Foreign Secretary raised those issues on his
recent visit, and I reinforced that in my meeting at the G20.
The right hon. and learned Gentleman went on to raise the
announcement about the partnership for global infrastructure and
investment. What he failed to mention in his criticism was that
that initiative—the PGII—was created by the UK under our G7
presidency. Far from being something that we are not part of, we
were the ones who made sure that we were there at its inception.
Again, he is, as ever, jumping on the latest bandwagon that he
can find. The PGII initiative will contain a range of different
projects. This particular one was also not signed by Canada,
Japan or Italy, for example. Each and every country will
participate in a range of projects. What did we do to make our
contribution? As I said, we made the single largest pledge this
country has ever made to the green climate fund. Why? Because it
is important that we play our part in helping countries make the
transition to net zero—something that we have led on previously
and, because of that commitment, we will continue to lead on.
What else did we do? We decided to work with other countries to
improve global food security, something that African nations in
particular have called on us to do. They have welcomed our
leadership in hosting a summit later this year, which will tackle
the cause at its root, improving crop yields and the resilience
of food supplies globally. I could go on. As ever, the right hon.
and learned Gentleman tries to find something to score a cheap
political point, and completely and utterly misunderstands what
this country is doing. As ever, he would prefer to talk this
country down than recognise the contribution we are making.
I am happy to address the right hon. and learned Gentleman’s
comments on the trade deal. I thought they were telling—he asked,
why do we not just sign it, why is it not done? I had a flashback
to all those conversations when we were leaving the EU. His
approach back then was just to sign any deal that was offered to
us. We know where that would have led. The right thing to do for
the British people is to fight hard for the things that we need.
We only need a deal that works for the British people and
delivers on our priorities. That is why it is right not to rush
these things, as he would do, clearly. We do not put arbitrary
deadlines on them. I take the time to make sure that they are
right for the British people.
Our track record is there: we are the first European nation to
accede to the comprehensive and progressive agreement for
trans-Pacific partnership—something else the right hon. and
learned Gentleman failed to mention. That is the most exciting,
dynamic trade bloc that exists in the world. The Asia-Pacific
accounts for 50% of the world’s population. Sixty per cent. of
goods trade passes through that region, and it will account for
over half of global growth in the coming decades. Now that we
have left the EU, we are able to join that trade bloc, and it is
excited to have us.
Lastly, on the right hon. and learned Gentleman’s point about
Brexit, again he failed to point out that since we left the
single market we have grown faster than France and Germany. I
will end where I started: as ever, when it comes to these things,
he is determined to talk Britain down. We are demonstrating that
Britain is leading on the global stage and delivering for the
British people.
Mr Speaker
I call the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee.
(Rutland and Melton)
(Con)
Let me start by putting on record my thanks to you, Mr Speaker,
and the parliamentary security and intelligence services for your
personal support over the last few months.
Here today, we know that across this House a real priority for
Members is the safety of British nationals arbitrarily detained
abroad. The Foreign Affairs Committee has recently released a
report on that matter. It cannot be right that consular access is
withheld on the basis of diplomatic silence being in place. I
know that my right hon. Friend raised the case of Jagtar Singh
Johal with the Indian Prime Minister at the weekend, but we are
not clear on the outcome of those discussions. Will the
Government finally officially call for his release? The UN has
accepted that he is arbitrarily detained. Does the Prime Minister
believe that he has been unfairly treated or even tortured while
being held?
The Prime Minister
We are committed to seeing Mr Johal’s case resolved as soon as
possible. We continue to provide consular assistance to him and
his family, and have raised concerns about issues including
consular access to Mr Johal, the judicial process and reports of
mistreatment, with the Indian Government on multiple occasions,
including myself with Prime Minister Modi just this weekend.
Mr Speaker
I call the Scottish National party spokesperson.
(West
Dunbartonshire) (SNP)
We have heard a lot of PR and spin today, and I am sure we will
hear a lot more. As ever in this game, what the Prime Minister is
not saying is almost as important as what he is saying. The
Leader of the official Opposition raised the case of President
Biden’s announcement. Can the Prime Minister tell us what part of
those projects his Government are involved in? They are worth
more than any FTA that we could sign, and will leave Brexit
Britain on the global sidelines yet again if it is not fully
involved. That is on top of the United States’ inflation-busting
and reduction Act tackling climate change.
On the bilateral meetings with the Prime Minister’s counterparts,
we heard of very strong concerns—relating to your statement
earlier, Mr Speaker—raised with Chinese Premier Li. Can the Prime
Minister advise the House when he was first notified of this
issue?
On the case of my constituent, Jagtar Singh Johal, which was
raised by the hon. Member for Rutland and Melton (), the Chair of the Foreign
Affairs Committee, the Prime Minister brought it up in
conversations with Prime Minister Modi. Given the widespread
concerns, in this place and outside, about the leaking of this
Government’s resolve to Jagtar Singh Johal, particularly in
relation to getting a trade deal over the line, will the Prime
Minister agree to meet me and Jagtar Singh Johal’s family, so he
can tell them exactly what he intends to do on their behalf?
The Prime Minister
I refer the hon. Gentleman to my previous answer on Mr Johal.
Most recently, the Foreign Office Minister met Mr Johal’s family
to discuss the case in detail.
Turning to the hon. Gentleman’s other points, on our investment
partnerships, the British investment partnership approach with
India, for example, has invested over £2 billion to support 600
different enterprises, employing about half a million people.
That is just to give him some sense of the scale of the
alternative projects we are involved in.
Lastly, I turn to the hon. Gentleman’s point, which the Leader of
the Opposition also raised, about the US Inflation Reduction Act
and the approach of other countries. Neither seem to recognise
that the approach we have taken is working for the UK, not least
with the recent announcement of a £4 billion investment in the UK
by Tata, which represents the single largest investment in our
auto industry, potentially ever, to build a gigafactory here.
That was followed by investment by Stellantis and BMW to secure
future electric vehicle manufacturing in the UK. Any which way we
look at it, our auto manufacturing sector is receiving record
amounts of investment to make the transition to
electricity-oriented vehicles. That is because of the tax,
regulatory and incentive regime we have put in place, which is
delivering real jobs and real opportunity for the British
people.
(Wokingham) (Con)
Did the Chinese representatives give any indication of when they
might stop their big increases in carbon dioxide and start to
reduce them? Does the Prime Minister agree with me that it makes
no sense for the UK to rely on Chinese imports of electric
vehicles, solar panels and other green products when they are so
CO2-intensive in their production, and deny us the jobs and added
value?
The Prime Minister
My right hon. Friend makes a good point. He will see in the G20
declaration a commitment by all members recognising the need to
peak emissions in the next couple of years. To his broader point,
that is why the Government have consulted on measures to address
carbon leakage. It is absolutely right that there is a level
playing field, and that if we take action here it should not come
at the cost of British workers if it ultimately makes no
difference to global emissions. That is why we have consulted on
proposals on carbon leakage, and I very much welcome his thoughts
on that.
(Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)
I join the House in sending our condolences to all those affected
by the tragic events in Morocco.
I thank the Prime Minister for his statement. He was, rightly,
strongly critical of President Putin in his statement, but I have
to say that I do not agree with his assessment of the G20
statement on Ukraine. The joint declaration failed to condemn
Russia for the invasion. Our Ukrainian allies labelled it
“nothing to be proud of”,
while the Russians called it
“a step in the right direction”.
Ukraine’s soldiers continue to give their lives in defence of
their country, while Ukrainian refugees continue to take shelter
here in the UK and elsewhere. Why did the Prime Minister feel he
was justified in signing up to such a weak communiqué?
The Prime Minister
I find it slightly strange that the right hon. Gentleman is using
what Russia describes the situation to be as evidence of support.
With everything we have seen over the past year we should not
believe a word coming out of Russia’s mouth, so that is a very
strange approach to take. What I would say to him on his
criticism is that I am not entirely sure who he is critical of,
because every single one of our Five Eyes partners and G7 allies
who was present also signed the G20 statement. We fought hard to
have a statement that we thought did in fact—as the US itself has
said, including the President and the Treasury Secretary—contain
substantially very strong language regarding Russia.
I went out to the summit specifically to raise the impact of
Russia’s illegal war on food security and food prices. The
language in the summit goes further than what we have had before,
highlighting that and calling for an end to attacks on food and
civilian infrastructure, and for the restoration of the Black sea
grain initiative. We also agreed on the significance of securing
a comprehensive, just and lasting peace based on the principles
of the UN charter, including territorial integrity. That is why
all our allies—I could go through the list of them—worked hard
for that statement and supported it. The right hon. Gentleman’s
criticism may well be of me, but he is also criticising every
single one of our closest allies.
Sir (New Forest East) (Con)
I welcome the robustness of the Prime Minister’s stance on
Russia, but does he agree that there are aspects of other topics
discussed at the G20, such as China, which he might not be able
to discuss in full on the Floor of the House, but which he could
discuss securely with the Intelligence and Security Committee? I
should add, however, that whereas for the first 20 years of the
Committee’s existence it had a meeting with the Prime Minister
every single year, there has been no such meeting since December
2014, although, during her short term in office, this Prime
Minister’s immediate predecessor did volunteer to reinstate such
meetings. May I ask him whether he will do the same—reinstate the
meetings and return to proper, comprehensive scrutiny?
The Prime Minister
I shall be happy to consider my right hon. Friend’s request, but
let me say in the meantime that I welcome the Committee’s report
on China, and am grateful for all its efforts. The Government are
considering its recommendations and conclusions carefully, and we
will publish our response in due course and in the usual
manner.
Sir (Rhondda) (Lab)
Surely one of the things that should keep the Prime Minister
awake at night—[Interruption.]
Mr Speaker
Order. Unfortunately, a Member behind the hon. Member for Rhondda
feels that he should be taken first. Let me just say that the
hon. Gentleman is second on the list of members of the Foreign
Affairs Committee, and is also one of its longest-serving
members.
Sir
As I was saying, Mr Speaker—seconds out, round 2—the one thing
that should keep the Prime Minister, or any Minister, awake at
night is the arbitrary detention of a British national in a
foreign country. One would hope that Ministers, including the
Prime Minister himself, would summon up every ounce of energy to
try to get people released. I am sorry, but I think that quite a
lot of us are very depressed by the Prime Minister’s answer to
the question from the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, the
hon. Member for Rutland and Melton (), about Jagtar Singh Johal,
who has been arbitrarily detained for six years. Everyone knows
that he is being tortured and mistreated. I took the Prime
Minister to say that he had not called for his release. Is that
really the truth?
The Prime Minister
No. As I said earlier, we consistently raise our concerns about
Mr Johal’s case with the Government of India, including concerns
about allegations of mistreatment and the right to a fair trial.
That is why the Foreign Office and Ministers are giving direct
support to Mr Johal’s family, and it is why I raised this
specific case with Mr Modi.
(Bournemouth East) (Con)
I welcome both the statement and the Prime Minister’s leadership
on Ukraine. Our national security and our economic security are
interdependent, and there is no better illustration of that than
the grain ships that are trying to get out of Odesa. The Prime
Minister mentioned the global food security summit. Could he
expand on that? As he knows, I have been campaigning for some
time for an international maritime protection force to help to
escort those ships out, which would assist not only the Ukrainian
economy but our own economy, because food inflation here is also
being affected. Will the Prime Minister advance that idea to
ensure that it is raised at the food security summit?
The Prime Minister
My right hon. Friend has focused on the issue of maritime
security in the Black sea for some time, and he has been correct
to do so. We are talking and working with partners, allies and,
indeed, Ukraine in considering all the different ways in which we
could ensure the safe exit of and access to grain from Ukraine,
and will continue to do so.
As for the global food summit that we will host in London, it
will focus on four themes: creating new approaches to ending the
preventable deaths of children, building a climate-resilient food
system, anticipating and preventing famine and food security
crises, and using science and technology to boost food security
and nutrition. We are also working to deliver the food summit in
combination with partners including the United States and
Somalia.
(Birmingham, Hodge Hill)
(Lab)
May I first associate myself with the sympathies extended to the
people of Morocco?
I welcome the language in paragraph 50 of the G20 communiqué
about building a bigger World Bank. The truth is that we need to
triple the lending of multilateral development banks if we are to
mobilise the climate finance that the world now needs, and we
cannot do that simply by building a better World Bank; we need to
build a bigger World Bank. In the United States, President Biden
is asking Congress to support a capital call and boost the
balance sheet of the World Bank. Why is the UK, one of the
founders of the World Bank, not leading the same argument? We
could even use the money we are getting back from the European
Investment Bank, and the Prime Minister, if he so chose, could
call it a Brexit dividend. The world leads a bigger World Bank
now, and the UK should be leading the case.
The Prime Minister
We are in fact leading the case on the World Bank’s balance
sheet, and through my right hon. Friend the Development Minister
we have had extensive conversations with the president of the
World Bank on precisely that matter. It is something I discussed
with colleagues at the G20, including the World Bank president
himself. We are also broadly leading the way on how else we can
reform the international financial system, including pioneering
the use of climate-resilient debt clauses, which has been
welcomed by countries around the world; channelling our IMF
special drawing rights back for use for developing countries; and
finding ways to stretch balance sheets to unlock more funding.
The UK is looked to as a leader in all these areas, not least as
we are announcing a conditional capital increase for the
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. All these
things together position us as a thought leader in changing the
international financial system. It was a subject of my
interventions at the G20 and, as I have said, the Development
Minister is taking forward this work at pace with our allies.
Sir (South Swindon) (Con)
I welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement, particularly the
inclusion in the communiqué of the G20 AI principles. I would
like to press him on what further work he and the United Kingdom
will be doing ahead of the AI summit in November to ensure that
work on the safety of AI more than outpaces work on capability,
and that we can move towards a meaningful principles-based
approach to the safe use of this vital new technology.
The Prime Minister
My right hon. and learned Friend is absolutely right about the
need for global co-operation when it comes to AI safety. It is
obviously a technology that does not respect national borders.
Again, this is an area where the UK is demonstrating leadership,
building on our expertise and our leading position in AI
research. We are having the conversation with partners about what
that principles-based approach to regulation would look like, to
ensure consistency across jurisdictions. We are also seeing what
we can do to make sure that the UK is the leading place for that
AI safety research, and that is the work of our AI taskforce,
which is currently under way and proceeding well.
(Vauxhall)
(Lab/Co-op)
I welcome the African Union as a permanent member of the G20.
Africa is one of the fastest-growing economies in the world and
it is important that her voice is at the table discussing major
global issues such as climate change, security and economic
stability. My own country of origin, Nigeria, is one of the
largest in Africa; it has over 223 million people, which is
rising daily. Can the Prime Minister outline what steps his
Government are taking towards a strategy for the continent?
The Prime Minister
I thank the hon. Lady for her excellent question and join her in
saying that we were delighted to agree the African Union’s
membership of the G20. She is right to highlight the increasing
importance of Africa in global affairs. Over the next decade or
so, Africa’s population will double to 2.5 billion people, with
60% of them under the age of 25. Also, Africa contributes just 4%
of global emissions but is home to 35 of the 50 countries most at
risk from climate change, so it is important that we are engaged
and supportive. I can tell her what we are doing. Now that we
have left the European Union and are in charge of our trade
policy, we have changed our tariff structure so that 98% of goods
imported into the UK from Africa will enter tariff-free. We are
making sure that our just energy transition partnerships help
countries such as South Africa with their transition, mobilising
billions of dollars of support. Next year, we will be hosting the
Africa investment summit with over 20 different countries,
because the UK, as measured by foreign direct investment, is the
largest investor in the continent.
(Chelmsford) (Con)
In an ever more dangerous world, having allies and partners is
really important, and trust is so important in keeping those
allies. I thank my right hon. Friend for the commitment he made
on climate change. It was a commitment we gave in Glasgow at COP,
and this shows that Britain is a country that keeps its promises.
Would he like to share examples of how that money will be spent,
how it will make our allies and partners stronger and how that
will help to strengthen our own security here in the UK?
The Prime Minister
I thank my right hon. Friend for all her work in this area. She
is right: it is important that we meet our commitment to £11.6
billion of international climate finance, and this particular
investment will ensure that we do that. It was warmly welcomed by
partner countries at the G20. She will know that the importance
of giving money through this multilateral fund rather than
bilaterally is that it can be leveraged multiple times, so every
pound that we contribute will be able to be used multiple times
more and attract more capital. In that way, we are helping to
fund hundreds, if not thousands, of projects across the world and
I know that the countries that benefit from them are extremely
grateful for our support.
(Birmingham, Perry Barr)
(Lab)
In his private meeting with Mr Modi, did the Prime Minister raise
the issue that, while we are supporting Ukraine, India is buying
huge amounts of oil from Russia and trading in engineering,
manufacturing and technology stocks? On the UK-India trade
agreement, did he raise the human rights of the Dalit community,
the Sikh community—particularly Jagtar Johal—and the Christian
community and the abuses that have taken place, including the
long-standing abuse of the Kashmiri community? For us to have a
trade agreement, it must be fair and based on human rights and
international law.
The Prime Minister
Supporting democracy and human rights is a core part of our
engagement not just with India but with all countries with which
we engage. When it comes to the situation in Kashmir, my view is
that it is not for the United Kingdom to prescribe a solution or
to act as a mediator.
(North West Cambridgeshire)
(Con)
Paragraph 30 of the G20 leaders’ declaration speaks of delivering
quality education. Mahatma Gandhi said, and I paraphrase, “If you
educate a man, you educate an individual. If you educate a woman,
you educate a family.” The UK is certainly doing as much as it
can to ensure that people across the globe who need education
receive it, especially girls and women. Will the Prime Minister
give an assurance that the UK will do all it possibly can to
ensure that the other members of the G20, including the newest
member, the African Union, do their bit to ensure that girls and
women in their countries, and across the world, are educated?
The Prime Minister
It was a privilege to visit Raj Ghat to pay tribute to Gandhi’s
work. My hon. Friend is right to highlight the importance of
equality and women’s access to education. I am very pleased that
Prime Minister Modi made this a central theme of the G20 summit,
and it is something we discussed. All of us in this House should
be proud of the UK’s contribution over the past several years. We
have helped to educate more than 8 million girls as part of our
development priority to provide all girls with 12 years of
high-quality education.
(Walthamstow) (Lab/Co-op)
I do not think anyone in this Chamber takes seriously what the
Russians may have to say about the G20, but we are listening to
what the Ukrainians have said, and in particular their statement
that there is nothing to be proud of in the joint statement. The
Prime Minister spoke about speaking to President Zelensky before
the summit. When he next rings him, how will he explain the fact
that the statement does not even mention the word “Russia”?
The Prime Minister
I know President Zelensky was incredibly supportive of our effort
to highlight Russia’s aggression, the impact it is having on food
prices and food security, and the damage it has done to civilian
infrastructure. He will be grateful for the fact we have
declassified intelligence that shows the world those attacks on
civilian ships. And I know he will be grateful for the work we
are doing with Ukraine to find alternative means to export
Ukrainian grain to the world, which is good not only for the
Ukrainian economy and its sustainability but for millions of the
world’s most vulnerable people.
(Gillingham and Rainham)
(Con)
I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement. He has said that ending
the war in Ukraine and holding Russia to account is a top
priority. I dealt with sanctions as a Foreign Office Minister,
and they are a key tool for the United Kingdom to address Putin’s
war machine. Forty-four non-aligned states are not supporting us
with sanctions against Russia, which is delaying the war in
Ukraine, and India is one of those countries. India takes Russian
oil, and some now say that it refines that oil and sells the
products into Europe, circumventing those sanctions. Did the
Prime Minister have those conversations with Prime Minister Modi?
If so, will India now change its behaviour?
The Prime Minister
Our position is of long standing and consistent: we urge all
countries to follow our lead, and the lead of others, in
sanctioning Russia. Obviously each country will approach that in
its own way. Our job is to continue raising the impact of
Russia’s illegal war, and to work with our allies to bring that
war to an end, including by enforcing our own sanctions. That is
why I announced the economic deterrence initiative in March, with
£50 million of funding being made available to improve our
enforcement of the UK sanctions regime. We are developing that
closely with our partners, and I think it will help to tighten
the vice on Russia’s economy.
(Eltham) (Lab)
In answer to my right hon. and learned Friend the Leader of the
Opposition, the Prime Minister wanted praise for the inception of
the partnership for global infrastructure and investment. The
agreement that was signed by the US, India, Saudi Arabia, the
United Arab Emirates, France, Germany, Italy and the European
Union is described as a landmark agreement, creating an economic
corridor across Europe, the middle east and India. If the
inception of the global partnership is worth claiming praise for,
will he explain—he did not answer this question earlier—why
Britain was not a signatory to that memorandum of
understanding?
The Prime Minister
As I have said previously, each country will contribute to the
effort in its own way. We are participating in many different
projects, together with our partner countries, that help
countries lessen their dependence on China. One thing we have led
on is the development of the common framework to ensure that
countries can get appropriate debt relief. Again, they are very
grateful for our leadership on that, with China having put many
countries in hock to it. We have created a framework and made
sure that China has engaged with it. It is already providing
relief to two countries and we are making sure that there are
more in the pipeline. That has been very welcome, but, again, it
is just an example of our leadership making a difference on these
complicated matters.
(New Forest West) (Con)
In 2015, I went to Delhi to implement the coalition Government’s
decision to end grant development aid to India. That policy has
not changed, has it?
The Prime Minister
The policy did change and we stopped providing traditional
development aid to India in 2015. Most UK funding is now in the
form of business investments which not only help India reduce
carbon emissions and address climate change, but deliver jobs and
opportunity for British companies here at home.
(Hornsey and Wood Green)
(Lab)
With so much at stake—the war in Ukraine, increasingly high
numbers of people suffering from famine and drought, and human
rights issues in places such as Iran or the Xinjiang part of
China—is now really the time for the Prime Minister to empty
chair the United Nations General Assembly?
The Prime Minister
I have just been over how our leadership on these matters is
unquestioned. We are an active and engaged member at the G20. In
just a couple of weeks, I will be at the European Political
Community summit as well. Let me gently point out something to
the hon. Lady about the UN General Assembly: as far as I can tell
from looking back at the records, on the vast majority of
occasions under the Labour Government it was not the Labour Prime
Minister who attended either.
(Boston and Skegness)
(Con)
The leaders’ declaration expresses the optimism about AI that I
know the Prime Minister and I share. It talks about the
importance of “international governance” and “international
co-operation”. How optimistic is he that all the countries at the
G20 can sign up to those sorts of principles, just as they signed
up to the joint declaration?
The Prime Minister
There was a good conversation about AI at the G20 summit. I am
optimistic that most countries are approaching this in a similar
way, recognising the tremendous opportunities for growth,
opportunity and transforming developments in healthcare and
education in particular, but cognisant of the challenges and
risks that AI poses, and keen to work together to find ways to
resolve those. Obviously, it is very early days in terms of
countries having this conversation and everyone learning
themselves about the potential of the technology. However, as I
said, I think that on this topic the UK can play a leadership
role, and that is what we will do.
(Huddersfield)
(Lab/Co-op)
Many of us were very impressed by the close relationship that the
Prime Minister obviously has with Prime Minister Modi. When he
had private time with Prime Minister Modi, did he ask him, first,
why he has not condemned Russia for the invasion of Ukraine?
Secondly, did he ask what Modi is doing to stop all the
persecution of Muslims and Christians, with their mosques and
churches being burnt, and with people being killed and
persecuted?
The Prime Minister
The Prime Minister and I discussed a range of issues. As I have
said, we talk about human rights and defending democracy in all
our international engagement, because those are values that we
believe in very dearly.
(Gainsborough) (Con)
Of course, migration is best dealt with by international
co-operation, but it also depends on decisive action at home. One
thousand five hundred Indians enter this country legally every
week. Last year 600 came across illegally in boats, and this year
there have been 600 in just the first three months. The Prime
Minister told me personally that he would lead by example by
having illegal migrants based at Catterick in his constituency.
This afternoon, the Ministry of Defence was unable to give me any
date on when they are going to come. Meanwhile, my council has
issued a stop notice against the slash-and-burn tactics of the
Home Office at RAF Scampton. The Prime Minister is the head of
the Government. Will he instruct Home Office Ministers to work
proactively with West Lindsey District Council to ensure that we
get a compromise, do our bit and take illegal migrants to a
secure location, and that we do not rely on decaying bases but
take action that will work in the future?
The Prime Minister
I thank my right hon. Friend for his constructive engagement. I
know that he will continue to represent his community strongly
and has engaged with Home Office Ministers on the particular
issues in his constituency. More broadly, we continue to
strengthen our co-operation with international partners to combat
illegal migration—something I discussed with many of my
counterparts at the G20, as I will continue to do through further
engagement this autumn—and look to find ways to formalise that
co-operation and improve returns agreements. As he mentioned, it
is important that we have the ability to return illegal migrants
who have come here from countries that are clearly safe places
for them. We have done that with Albania and are strengthening
the returns agreements with other countries, too.
(Tiverton and Honiton)
(LD)
It is disappointing that the this year’s statement from the G20
does not name the perpetrator of aggression in Ukraine. What kind
of statement is it where G20 leaders feel the need to spin the
interpretation of it after the event? Does the Prime Minister
agree with Canada’s Liberal Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, who
said yesterday that if it were up to him, the language on the war
would have been stronger?
The Prime Minister
It goes without saying that, because this is not the G7 or,
indeed, the G1, it is not for us just to take the language that
we ourselves would like. Our position on Ukraine is crystal clear
for all to see, but the G20 is a collection of a large group of
countries that do not all share the same perspective on global
affairs or, indeed, the same values. To assume that it can
reflect the unanimity that we have in the G7 is simply to
misunderstand how foreign affairs actually works.
The hon. Member asked about what the statement said. It agreed on
the significance of securing a comprehensive, just and lasting
peace. The statement specifically called for an end to attacks on
food and civilian infrastructure and for Russia to rejoin the
Black sea grain initiative. Indeed, it highlighted the suffering
that it is causing. It was also a statement that the United
States described as containing “substantively very strong”
language on the situation. This why to have agreement among G20
members, even if it is not exactly the language we would have
chosen, is still a positive outcome from this summit.
(Truro and Falmouth)
(Con)
I, too, associate myself with the Prime Minister’s words about
Morocco and the people of Morocco, and I pay tribute to
Truro-based ShelterBox, which as ever has a team standing ready
for deployment at the point that the Moroccan Government need it.
Will the Prime Minister tell the House what conversations he has
had with his G20 partners about critical mineral extraction, not
only to boost local production from Cornwall—lithium,
obviously—but to ensure that we have supply chains that cut out
rogue partners?
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend makes an excellent point about the need to improve
our economic resilience and security, which is why that is an
increasing feature of the partnerships and agreements that we
strike around the world. Indeed, it was a feature of the
partnership agreement that I struck with Japan when I was there
and with the US when I visited recently. I spoke to President
Biden and Prime Minister Kishida about those agreements and the
work that we are doing. In both cases, there are milestones for
us to meet with regard to strengthening our co-operation on
critical minerals in particular.
(Harrogate and Knaresborough)
(Con)
I welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement. He rightly
highlighted the importance of international trade and the
progress that he has made, including new partnerships joined.
Will he perhaps give a bit more detail on the progress made on
securing a UK-India deal?
The Prime Minister
We do make, and have made, substantial progress, but as I said,
there is hard work left to do and that is why we will we keep at
it. But it is right that we do not put arbitrary deadlines on
these trade deals and that we keep going until they work for the
British people, British companies and the British Government.
That is what we will endeavour to do. As I say, we have made lots
of progress, but we will not sign a deal unless it is right for
the United Kingdom.
(Vale of Glamorgan) (Con)
I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his leadership in securing
the outcomes of the summit. Further to his response to my hon.
Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (), in view of the scale of the
population and the speed of growth in India, the areas of joint
expertise and the co-operation that has taken place to date, as
well as the deep-rooted ties the UK has with India, which spread
across the whole of the United Kingdom, can my right hon. Friend
assure me that as he progresses the negotiations on the trade
deal, he will ensure that it contains a chapter or elements that
allow for small businesses and medium-sized enterprises across
the UK and beyond to trade effectively with India?
The Prime Minister
My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. Unquestionably, India
is if not the most, then one of the most significant and
consequential countries for global affairs over the coming years
and decades. It is absolutely right and important that the United
Kingdom has a close relationship with India that spans not just
economic co-operation but areas including defence and security,
and science and technology research collaboration. We are aiming
to enhance our partnership in all those areas, for the reasons he
mentioned. This will be to the long-term benefit of the UK if we
get it right.
(Bracknell) (Con)
Members will know that the next G20 summit will be held in Rio in
November 2024. I note with interest that Brazil has already
placed on the agenda something called
“reform of the global governance institutions”.
Does the Prime Minister agree that reform of the UN Security
Council should be considered with the best interests of the UK at
heart, so that the UN Security Council remains a viable framework
for global security, and that Britain must never put Britain’s
seat at the table on the table?
The Prime Minister
We have spoken in the past about support for additional members
of the UN Security Council, including in India, and it is
something we continue to do. As my hon. Friend has seen, at this
G20 summit we warmly supported and welcomed the inclusion of the
African Union in the G20, because he makes a good point that
international institutions need to adapt and change continually,
to reflect the reality of the current state of global
affairs.
(Colne Valley) (Con)
I was very proud earlier this month to celebrate Ukraine
Independence Day with Huddersfield’s vibrant Ukrainian community.
I heard at first hand how proud they are of the UK’s steadfast
support for Ukraine. With Brazil taking over the presidency of
the G20, will the Prime Minister continue to work with our
international allies and partners to increase and build on our
wonderful support for Ukraine, and to build unity in condemning
Putin’s barbaric and illegal invasion of Ukraine?
The Prime Minister
I agree wholeheartedly with my hon. Friend, and pay tribute to
him and his constituents for all they are doing to support
Ukraine and Ukrainian families. UK support for Ukraine now
amounts to over £9 billion, and 29 different states have now
signed up to the declaration we helped to initiate to provide
long-term security support to Ukraine, so he can be confident in
our steadfast support for Ukraine. It is not going away; we are
here to stay, which is why we will tell Russia that now is the
time to lay down arms and come to a sensible, peaceful
resolution.
Mr Deputy Speaker ( )
I thank the Prime Minister for his statement today, and for
responding to questions for 55 minutes.
|
