Extracts from King's
Speech debate (Commons)
(East Dunbartonshire)
(SNP):...Moving on to compassion, there are many ways in which I
could question the compassion of this place, but there is nothing
more timely or truly horrific than the ongoing attacks on
civilians in Gaza. We are witnessing the biggest humanitarian
crisis many of us have seen in our lifetimes, and this place has
rightfully expressed compassion for those killed and suffering
in Israel
yet the compassion is lacking for those children in Gaza. Each
day that this place fails to unite behind a ceasefire, children
die. Where is the compassion for those children?
(Tiverton and Honiton)
(LD)
Would the hon. Member get behind a unilateral or a bilateral
ceasefire?
I would get behind a ceasefire. We are talking about a
ceasefire.
(Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)
With both sides stopping.
Yes, with both sides stopping. The hostages should be returned
to Israel and
we should see a ceasefire. I think that is relatively
straightforward, is it not?
(Gainsborough) (Con):...The
advantage of the King’s Speech debate is that we can range quite
widely, and in the few minutes I have, I shall raise a few
general points. We have a new Foreign Secretary, a new Home
Secretary and a new Health Secretary. The challenges facing the
Foreign Secretary are enormous, both in the middle east and in
Ukraine. On the earlier intervention, I am all in favour of a
ceasefire, but it must be by both sides, and there is no
intimation yet that if Israel were
to announce a ceasefire, Hamas would follow suit. If Hamas are
now prepared to commit themselves to a permanent ceasefire
with Israel and
respect the right of Israeli citizens to live in
peace and tranquillity, I am sure we can have a negotiation on
that basis, but I do not see that happening.
We also need to have a tone of compassion for the Palestinian
people. The Palestinian people are not Hamas. I was quite
impressed by what President Macron was saying on this. The
Israeli Government have the right to defend
themselves, but it must be in proportion, and I think we are all
devastated and concerned about the plight of women, children and
babies in Gaza. The Israeli Government have to
deal with this issue in a proportionate way...
(Walsall South) (Lab): Let me
start by saying what a pleasure it is to follow the right hon.
Member for Gainsborough ( ). I also welcome the hon.
Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip (), who will make his maiden
speech; he will know that we campaign in slogans but we sometimes
have to make difficult decisions when we represent our
constituents, as we have seen with the international issues
taking place in Israel and
Gaza...
(Wansbeck) (Lab): The issues that we have all been
discussing today, and will discuss further, are extremely
important, but looking at what is happening globally, they appear
extremely trivial. The unbearable terror, suffering and death of
innocent civilians in the middle east, in Gaza and
Israel must
stop, which is why I have added my name to the call for an
immediate ceasefire...
(Worcester) (Con):...I very
much understand the concerns that have been raised by members of
both the Jewish and Muslim communities in
Worcester about the importance of protecting civilians. We all
want to see an end to the fighting and progress towards a
two-state solution, but I am as appalled as anyone by the
brutality of Hamas’s attacks on Israeli
civilians. I recognise that any country facing such an assault
has a right to self-defence, but I urge colleagues in government
to be critical and clear-sighted friends of Israel and
champions of a two-state solution, and to remember the full
wording of the Balfour declaration:
“it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may
prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish
communities in Palestine”.
We should continue to oppose antisemitism wherever it occurs, and
we should continue to do all we can to get humanitarian aid to
the innocent civilians in the Palestinian territories who are
victims of Hamas’s atrocities as much as their intended
targets...
Private Notice Question
(Lords) on Policing of Marches and Demonstrations
Asked by
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of
the policing of recent marches and demonstrations.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office () (Con)
My Lords, the police are operationally independent: it is their
decision how they choose to police a protest and they are
accountable for that. The Metropolitan Police used a range of
powers to minimise disruption and disorder. On Saturday police
made 145 arrests, most of which were linked to the
counterdemonstration; however, the police continue to investigate
other offences. The police have the Government’s full backing to
use all the powers at their disposal to ensure that the
perpetrators face the full force of the law. As is right, the
Government will continue to hold the police to account. I think
it is also right to acknowledge that Remembrance Weekend events
passed without disruption.
(CB)
My Lords, freedom to speak and to march and police discretion are
all pillars of our constitution, but I have never before in my
lifetime seen mobs marching through the streets alongside some
who call for violent jihad and the death of Jews and waving
swastika signs. Once the Saturday march was under way, why were
the police posing with a child dressed as a terrorist while
protesters rampaged threateningly outside a synagogue? Many of us
call on the police to apply the law to those who are guilty of
offences under Section 5 of the Public Order Act aggravated by
religious and racial hatred, public nuisance and glorifying
terrorism. It is a worldwide problem. Anti-Semitism is on parade.
Jews cannot fix it on their own; we need people with us. Does the
Minister agree that we need a cry of solidarity?
(Con)
I wholeheartedly agree, and I was very emphatic on that point at
the Dispatch Box last week. We saw vile examples of anti-Semitism
by a minority at the pro-Palestine march. The fears that our
Jewish community has experienced over the weekend and the days
leading up to it are shocking and disgusting, as I said last
week. There is no place for hate on Britain’s streets, and the
police have confirmed that investigations are ongoing.
(Non-Afl)
My Lords, as someone who marched with hundreds of thousands of
very peaceful protesters last Saturday, I witnessed not one
single incitement to hatred of anyone. It was a march for peace
until the EDL came on to the scene, and we all saw what happened.
Will the Minister assure all those who marched for peace that
they will not be chequered by the way they are being depicted as
jihadis? The simple fact is that they were not.
(Con)
My Lords, a quick surf of the internet this morning would suggest
that the noble Baroness is wrong. I suggest that trying to
conflate the activities of the violent thugs who tried to invade
the Cenotaph and those of the marchers, some of whom were indeed
peaceful, is also wrong. The fact is that 15 officers were
injured at the Cenotaph, two of whom required hospital treatment,
and my best wishes go to those officers. I think the police
behaved entirely appropriately in dealing with the violence, and
I seriously hope that they also deal with those marchers who were
doing precisely the things that the noble Baroness has alleged
they were not.
Earl Russell (LD)
My Lords, in light of the unplanned departure of the previous
Home Secretary and the extraordinary and deeply concerning
violent events witnessed on the streets of London this weekend,
can the Minister confirm whether the new Home Secretary will use
more restrained language, to ease tensions on our streets, and
refrain from interfering in the operational independence of the
Metropolitan Police?
(Con)
On the second part of the question, the previous Home Secretary
did not interfere with the operational independence of the
Metropolitan Police. On the first part, I have not yet spoken to
the new Home Secretary, but I wish him very well in his new
role.
(CB)
My noble friend is right that there has been an explosion of
anti-Semitism in the capital and across the UK since 7 October.
These marches are at the very least a factor in aggravating that.
If the police, in exercising their judgment, feel that there is
not sufficient trigger at the moment to say that there is a
threat of serious public disorder, which is the current bar, is
there not a case for re-examining the bar for asking for these
marches to be banned, so that the cumulative effect on many
members of the Jewish community can properly be taken into
account?
(Con)
The noble Lord makes a very good point. The Home Secretary has
reserve powers and some legislative tools that enable
intervention and direction, but those powers may be used only in
line with statutory tests and public law principles and in very
exceptional circumstances. The Metropolitan Police has not asked
for that sort of intervention. He is quite right that the
Government have been in regular contact with the police over the
use of their powers to manage protests. Where we identify gaps in
the legislation, we will seek to address them. As was widely
reported this morning, that is still under review.
My Lords, any violence and threat is to be deplored, wherever it
comes from. I congratulate the police, who did a superb job in
very difficult circumstances. Of course there will be groups of
people pushing the boundaries and acting unacceptably. The danger
of the media is that it gives the impression that the only game
in town is the marches and demos, but many on these Benches and
other Members of this House have been meeting leading Israelis
and Palestinians in our local communities and finding that there
are people desperately trying to reach out to others and thinking
about how we can take this forward. What are His Majesty’s
Government doing at the moment to mobilise some of our leading
Israelis and Palestinians to try to enable talks about how we
might find a more positive narrative as we go forward?
(Con)
The right reverend Prelate makes an extremely good point. I
commend his activities and those of his colleagues and other
faith leaders in trying to find civilised solutions to this
problem. I am afraid I do not know what His Majesty’s Government
are doing to try to encourage the sort of interactions he
mentioned, but it deserves to be mentioned, on proportionality,
that the organisers of the pro-Palestinian marches have a
responsibility. Peter Tatchell, whom many in the House will know,
was blocked from marching with the pro-Palestinians for carrying
a sign that said:
“End Israel’s occupation! End Hamas’s sexist, homophobic,
anti-human rights dictatorship!”
That is pretty disgraceful. Everybody needs to exercise
proportionality in this.
(Non-Afl)
My Lords, I declare an interest as set out in the register.
Anti-Semitism is unacceptable in any setting, but does the
Minister agree that arresting people in the middle of a mass
protest can result in serious disorder and injury to police
officers, as can the police attempting to prevent people who are
determined to protest from doing so, as we saw with the
right-wing demonstrators on Saturday?
(Con)
My Lords, on this I am very happy to defer to the noble Lord’s
extensive experience of policing protests of this type. It is
self-evident that if you wade into a crowd, there is a chance
that you will inflame tensions. The police are operationally
independent and I will not judge what they did, but their
approach makes some sense to me in that context.
(Lab)
My Lords, as the right reverend Prelate did, I thank the
Metropolitan Police and all the officers who were on the streets
of London ensuring that Armistice Day events were not disrupted,
facing disgraceful far-right violence and assaults while working
to pursue appalling, vile anti-Semitism—as the noble Baroness,
Lady Deech, pointed out to us—and other hate crimes. Does the
Minister agree that it would have been helpful in the run-up to
these events to have had a Home Secretary who calmed tensions
rather than using language that inflamed some of the protests and
policing that we saw? Above all, despite the Minister’s points to
this House, will the new Home Secretary ensure that never again
do we have a situation in which a Home Secretary of this country
seems to question the operational independence of the police? Is
it not one of the fundamental parts of our democracy that the
police can police without fear or favour?
(Con)
I agree with the noble Lord. It is, as he knows, governed by a
pretty rigorous protocol. I went into the details of that
protocol last week, and I can do it again if anybody wants to
hear it—I suspect they do not.
The previous Home Secretary is no longer in post, so debating
what she did or did not say seems moot. As regards the new Home
Secretary, I have not spoken to him and I do not know what he is
thinking.
(Non-Afl)
My Lords, it is no surprise that we are seeing Nazi-level
propaganda and incitement of terrorism on the streets of London
when some of the organisations behind these marches have had
connections with a Hamas leader who lives in the UK. What is
being done to investigate the links between those organisations
and proscribed terrorist groups?
(Con)
I cannot answer that question, but I certainly hope the police
are investigating.
(Con)
My Lords, I revert to the point made by the right reverend
Prelate the . It would be a
marvellous beginning for the new Home Secretary if he were to
call in leaders of the Jewish community—who have the admiration
and respect of us all—together with those responsible
Palestinians who have a legitimate cause for concern at the
destruction and deaths in Gaza. If he were to do that, using
moderate language—which I am sure he would—it would help to ease
tension and to bring together people who have a common cause.
(Con)
I am happy to reflect my noble friend’s opinion to the new Home
Secretary when I speak to him.
(Lab)
My Lords, I agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Deech, that the
examples she gave are completely unacceptable and should be met
with a firm response. The degree of anti-Semitism in the country
at the moment is deeply shocking, as is the degree of racism and
Islamophobia. That is something we should commonly confront, but
I urge the Government to be very careful about curbing protests
and the right to march through London. In 1936, when
anti-fascists confronted Mosley’s mob swaggering through Jewish
communities, many of the actions of those anti-fascists could
have been regarded as disorderly, but they stopped them and they
stopped that wave of anti-Semitism. Similarly, many of the
actions I helped organise through the Anti-Nazi League in the
late 1970s saved local Jewish communities and black communities
from assault. Be very careful about curbing the right to march
peacefully.
(Con)
I entirely agree with the noble Lord.
(LD)
My Lords, we are told that two of those arrested in Paris for
painting anti-Semitic slogans on French synagogues have said to
the police that they were acting under orders from Russian
sources. Are the Government looking to see whether there is any
element of foreign interference in some of these protests? It is
in the Russian interest to stir up disorder in this country, and
this is a very easy way to do it.
(Con)
My Lords, I have absolutely no idea.
(Non-Afl)
One of the saddest pictures we saw over the weekend was of the
two poppy sellers—an elderly couple in Victoria station—having to
be gradually moved and shifted because of large numbers of loud
and very angry protesters around them. What annoyed me, and I
think vast numbers of members of the public, was that the police
standing there did nothing to help those poppy sellers. They
seemed to be more interested in supporting and helping the
demonstrators. Did the Metropolitan Police Commissioner give an
outright order to rank and file police that they had to go very
easy with protesters but stamp down on anything else that seemed
to be out of order?
(Con)
My Lords, I do not know what direct orders the Metropolitan
Police Commissioner gave. As I said earlier, the response to the
Cenotaph, where violence was being deployed, was swift and
appropriate—not that it is my call to judge the police’s actions;
that is for the courts. I do not know whether he gave those sorts
of orders. I was at Victoria station by chance on Saturday
afternoon, and I have never felt more uncomfortable in this
country because of the tension. It was palpable in the air. It
was disgraceful.
(Non-Afl)
My Lords, I have visited Jewish communities across the United
Kingdom over the last few weeks. Everywhere the message is the
same: Jewish people and Jewish families are scared. Does the
Minister agree with me that the increased police presence we have
seen in Jewish communities, be it in Leeds, Manchester, London or
elsewhere, has been essential in ensuring that people have been
kept safe? Can we be certain that this increased presence will
continue for as long as it is needed?
(Con)
I certainly hope so. Police forces up and down the country have
stepped up their neighbourhood patrols to support local Jewish
and Muslim communities, including visiting schools, synagogues
and mosques. We have seen a rise in the anti-Semitism that the
noble Lord describes; that is appalling. I certainly hope that
the police’s response will stay in place for as long as it is
needed.
(Lab)
My Lords, I refer to my policing interests in the register. There
were clearly images of people on those marches over the weekend
doing appalling things. I hope the Metropolitan Police and other
police forces are using those images to track down the
individuals concerned and then to take action against them. No
doubt the Minister will be able to confirm that this is the case.
Can he also draw attention to the huge march against
anti-Semitism that took place in Paris? Does he think it would be
appropriate if something similar happened in this country?
(Con)
The police have said that they are investigating those images so,
yes, I think I can confirm to the noble Lord that this is
happening. I would certainly like to see a march against
anti-Semitism, and I would join it.
