Extracts from King's
Speech debate (Lords)
(Non-Afl):...In a
very fine speech in this House on Israel and Gaza,
the noble Lord, , noted that the BBC
“uncritically” repeated Hamas officials’ claims
“that Israel had struck the
Al-Ahli hospital”—[Official Report, 24/10/23; col. 592.]
in Gaza, and that the claims were presented as fact. When it was
clarified that, actually, it was an Islamic Jihad rocket, the
defamatory report remained on the BBC website, unaltered. It was
viewed by millions and was cited as verified fact by too many at
the start of what has become an ever-growing climate of
anti-Semitic hatred on our streets.
Mind you, if you watch PSB news, you may not see the scale of
this anti-Semitic problem. In coverage of the Armistice demo at
the weekend, I got the sense that some journalists from the likes
of, for example, Channel 4, were almost relieved to spot familiar
bigots in the guise of Tommy Robinson and friends; these were the
dangerous thugs that all bien pensants in the media recognise and
denounce. However, they somehow managed to miss the racist
bigotry aimed at Jews: protesters dressed up as Hamas terrorists;
placards featuring swastikas in the Star of David; and those
caught on film shouting, “Kill all Jews”, or, “Hitler knew how to
deal with these people”. None of this featured in the mainstream
news at all, so I am grateful to those citizen journalists and
freelancers such as Inc.Monocle—we should all follow him—for
filming and photographing so comprehensively that we have
material we all need to see. I note that the Met Police is using
that material as evidence for its post-event, Wild West-style
“Wanted” posters. My question is: why was more of this not on PSB
channels?
Also, as a follow-on to the endless arguments I had with
Ministers on what is now the Online Safety Act, it is worth
noting that those much-maligned platforms are often invaluable
for publishing inconvenient truths and proof of why free speech
online is so important. Censorship is never the answer to hate.
Hamas despises freedom but, for democracies, it is our lifeblood.
This is why I am not convinced by the Economic Activity of Public
Bodies Bill, which tries to ban boycotts and divestment projects
rather than democratically convincing public bodies against
treating Israel as a pariah
state and using censorious tactics to punish it, Israeli
products, Israeli speakers, Jewish shops and so on.
This is also why we should all be anxious about one of the
Secretaries of State associated with these debates, , calling on UK Research
and Innovation—UKRI—to shut down its equality, diversity and
inclusion committee on the grounds that some of its academic
members put anti-Israel posts on social media. Although I
disagree profoundly with the sentiments expressed by those
academics—such as labelling Israel as an
apartheid state guilty of genocide, which I find disgusting—I am
also disgusted when a Government Minister interferes with
academic freedom. Surely this makes a mockery of the Higher
Education (Freedom of Speech) Act that we passed earlier this
year and of which I was rather proud.
Talking of equality, diversity and inclusion, it is a sign of the
times that, although I welcome confirmation of the construction
of the Holocaust Memorial and Learning Centre, my first thought
was, “They’ll need extra-heavy security because it could be
attacked”. My second thought was, “Oh no, I hope the memorial
project won’t have an EDI committee or activists might demand
that it decolonise the content and rebrand Jewish victims of the
Holocaust as colonisers”—a fashionable slander that is very
popular in educational and cultural institutions as we speak...
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for
Culture, Media and Sport ( of Whitley Bay) (Con):...A
number of noble Lords mentioned the importance of our broadcast
media. The noble Baroness, Lady Fox of Buckley, is right to
highlight the importance of the BBC’s impartiality, but also of
the way it describes global events. The attacks by Hamas in
Israel since 7 October are
terrorist acts committed by a terrorist organisation, proscribed
as such in the United Kingdom since 2021 and by a number of other
Governments and international organisations. The Secretary of
State has been clear how proud she is of our world-leading BBC,
but in this case she does not believe it has set the right
standard. True impartiality means being grounded in facts. The
legal position in the UK on this matter is clear: Hamas members
are terrorists. Calling these acts what they are and accurately
labelling the perpetrators helps audiences to understand what has
happened, what is still happening and its context. That is the
point that the Secretary of State has been clear to the BBC
about...
Extracts from King's
Speech debate (Commons)
(Sheffield South East)
(Lab):...Finally, I completely condemn Hamas’s attack on innocent
Israeli citizens, but I condemn just as strongly
what Israel is now doing.
The killing of innocent women, children and other civilians in
Gaza is not acceptable and cannot continue as it is. I want to
see a humanitarian pause and an end to the blockade to get aid
into Gaza, and I want to see that as the basis for a ceasefire. A
ceasefire cannot just be announced; both parties need to sit down
and agree to one. That has to be done, and it has to be a
stepping-stone to moving forward to a two-state solution: safety
for Israel and a free Palestine,
free of Israeli occupation. That is what we should be moving
towards....
(Walthamstow)
(Lab/Co-op):...What we are seeing is small responses to big
challenges, not least to the biggest challenge of all, which is
the uncertainty and conflict around the world. Everybody in this
Chamber wants the bloodshed to stop in Israel and Gaza.
Everybody in this Chamber, I hope, stands with people like my
constituent whose parent has been kidnapped by Hamas and wants to
see them returned and to see the dismantling of Hamas as a
terrorist organisation. A humanitarian pause would require the
same type of negotiation as a ceasefire. Let us stand together
with our international partners and put pressure on those
partners who can put pressure on Hamas to get people round the
table. Let us challenge Israel to stand up for
international humanitarian law, and let us stop the bloodshed.
This King’s Speech does nothing to achieve that, but it could
have done....
(Leeds East) (Lab): I will
address the crisis in the middle east and the Government’s
failure to back the growing calls for a ceasefire from the UN
Secretary-General and beyond, and I will speak to amendment (b),
tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry South (), of which I am a
sponsor.
Already, after just five weeks, more than 11,000 people in Gaza
and more than 1,200 Israelis have been killed. It is the duty of
everyone in this House to help save life—both Palestinian and
Israeli—to help stop the bombing, to help end the suffering, to
help free the hostages, to stop the war crimes, and to get the
aid that is so desperately needed into Gaza. That means that we
have to work for a ceasefire, and that work needs to happen
now—there is not a second to waste.
The UN Secretary-General says that the way forward is a
ceasefire, and so does the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
In fact, the heads of all major UN agencies are calling for a
humanitarian ceasefire, so why do our Government think that they
know better than the world’s leading humanitarian agencies?
President Macron has now called for a ceasefire, so France joins
other European nations such as Spain, Norway, Portugal,
Switzerland and Ireland, as well as the UN Secretary-General, in
that call. Other major nations, such as Brazil, and middle
eastern nations including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab
Emirates and Egypt, are all calling for a ceasefire.
Securing a negotiated ceasefire—one binding on all sides—is
achievable but it requires a huge diplomatic effort. It is time
for our Government to add their weight to the push for a
ceasefire rather than dismissing out of hand a proposal that has
growing international support—especially when polls show that two
thirds of the British public want a ceasefire. I am afraid that
the Government have instead sought to distort what is being
demanded, so let us be totally clear: a ceasefire means that all
sides stop firing. That requires negotiation, so our Government
should be straining every sinew, using every possible diplomatic
avenue, and talking to Governments of all persuasions—those with
sway in Israel and those with
channels to Hamas, such as Qatar—to secure a negotiated ceasefire
that is binding on all parties, and bring an end to this
crisis.
Of course, securing a ceasefire will not be easy, but it will not
happen if Governments do not even bother to try. Once we secure
that ceasefire, instead of more bloodshed, more suffering and
occupation, let us turn this moment—as difficult as it now
seems—into the moment when we secure, alongside Israel the viable
Palestinian state that is so needed for the cause of justice.
(North Down) (Alliance): I
want to concentrate on the Northern Ireland economy, as this is
primarily a debate on the economy. First, however, I want to
touch upon the situation in the middle east, and in particular
the need for a ceasefire. I utterly condemn the actions of Hamas
as terrorism. However, we must recognise that Israel’s response
has been disproportionate, represents collective punishment and
sees ongoing breaches of international humanitarian law. We have
all been deeply touched by the images we have seen on our
televisions, and we know that there is a massive humanitarian
crisis ongoing in Gaza.
Hopefully, we all recognise that there is no military solution to
the situation. The only way forward lies in both Israel and Palestine having
freedom and security, and the reaching of a political
accommodation, notably with a two-state solution. Continued death
and destruction achieves nothing—arguably, it makes the situation
even harder, because it will only compound people’s sense of
bitterness and feed extremism. It also risks wider regional
escalation. A ceasefire, which must include the release of
hostages and humanitarian access, requires a collective
international effort, as does the renewed peace process that
should follow any initial ceasefire. I hope I can speak with some
degree of authority on peace processes, given my experience in
Northern Ireland....
(Leeds North West)
(Lab/Co-op):...I want to discuss Gaza, which the King referred to
in his Gracious Speech. I, like many others, was at a Remembrance
Sunday event at a local church. I was privileged to read Micah 4,
which states:
“He will judge between many peoples and will settle disputes for
strong nations far and wide. They will beat their swords into
ploughshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not
take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war any
more. Everyone will sit under their own vine and under their own
fig-tree”.
Rev. Matt Broughton of St Giles then gave the eulogy. He drew
attention to the fact that the same land that is being fought
over now was being fought over 3,000 years ago. Micah was under
threat of attack and assault, but he could see the need for peace
and a peaceful settlement, and the need to turn those swords into
ploughshares. He also drew attention to the fact that the only
settlement would be through negotiation, as we ourselves saw in
Northern Ireland and as the Spanish saw in the Basque country
Although, as Matt Broughton said, now is a time of uncertainty,
disharmony and fear, we need to look to the future and think
about how we can recreate two states for two peoples. It is
incumbent on us, as the UK Parliament, and on the UK Government
to join the international efforts that are being made. Pedro
Sánchez, the Spanish Prime Minister, has proposed that there
should be a peace conference after the conclusion of the
conflict. It is important that we create an intergenerational
peace for the people of Israel and the people
of Palestine. This is not a goal that should be seen as too lofty
or too difficult. It is the only way in which we will move beyond
the current conflict, and beyond the discussions we are having
about the cessation of hostilities or a ceasefire. It is the only
way in which we will bring peace to both peoples. Some say that
there are not the partners for peace on both sides, but if we are
to reach this goal, the international community must make it
their top priority to find those individuals who exist in
both Israel and Palestine, and
promote and support them...
(Birmingham, Hall Green) (Lab):
I will speak to amendment (b), tabled in the name of my hon.
Friend the Member for Coventry South (), to which I am a signatory.
It is a great shame that the King’s Speech paid little heed to
the immediate need for a ceasefire in Gaza. It is over a month
since the dreadful attacks on Israeli civilians on 7 October
prompted a massive wave of retaliatory violence in Gaza. Over
11,000 innocent Palestinians have been killed and over 25,000
injured. The majority of those killed and injured have been women
and children, who have long been suffering the inhumane living
conditions in Gaza, the largest open-air prison in the world.
Hamas’s attack was contemptible and rightly condemned, but the
evils committed on 7 October do not justify the disproportionate
and unlawful response by Israel The
indiscriminate bombing of hospitals, bakeries and even refugee
camps has maximised the suffering of the Palestinian people and
driven them out of their homes. The withholding of water, food,
fuel and medicine by Israel constitutes
collective punishment, which is prohibited under international
law. Israel has failed to
respond proportionately or lawfully, and it has now killed more
civilians than have been killed in all world conflicts over the
last three years. It is no surprise that United Nations experts
have expressed a grave concern that the people in Gaza are facing
imminent genocide. Those experts have also made it clear that
Israel’s allies bear responsibility for the tragic situation
unfolding in Gaza and that without immediate and decisive action,
the Palestinian people face either death or complete displacement
from their homes.
Given the terrible suffering of the people of Gaza, most of the
British public now support a ceasefire—a position that is not
reflected by this Government. A ceasefire is crucial to stopping
the violence and allowing vital humanitarian assistance to find
its way into Gaza. It is also essential to restarting a peace
process that would see a secure Israel coexisting
with a legitimate Palestinian state. However, on this issue the
international community and the UK in particular have failed.
Illegal settlers supported by the Israeli Government have, for
years, seized land and property from Palestinians in the west
bank, undermining the territorial integrity and sovereignty of
any potential Palestinian state. Israeli forces have continually
attacked worshippers at the al-Aqsa mosque in East Jerusalem,
Palestinian families and businesses have been forced out of East
Jerusalem, and the blockade of Gaza has continued unabated for
many years. There are clearly elements within Israeli politics
who have no wish or desire to see Palestinians co-exist
alongside Israel and who have
used various means to prevent this from happening.
In this context, the much-needed leadership of countries such as
ours in the peace process has been absent. There is still no
indication of when the UK will formally recognise the state of
Palestine, despite years of promises. Earlier today, we heard
statements about a two-state solution. For a two-state solution
there have to be two equal states, both of which have to be
recognised. Of the 193 member countries of the United Nations, we
are one of 55 that do not recognise Palestine. How can we talk
about a two-state solution when we do not even recognise them as
equals?
The Palestinian people have been abandoned, and now, in their
time of greatest need, this Government cannot bring themselves to
call for an immediate ceasefire. That is why, along with my
colleagues in this House, I will continue to demand a ceasefire
in Gaza. When half a million people taking to the streets to
demand a ceasefire has been labelled by some Members as a “hate
march,” we realise that humanity has failed.
Extract from Commons consideration of the Draft Counter-Terrorism
and Security Act 2015 (Risk of Being Drawn into Terrorism)
(Revised Guidance) Regulations 2023
The Minister for Security ():...Hamas’s brutal terrorist attack and extremist
exploitation of the conflict in Israel and Gaza serve
as stark reminders as to what happens when extremism is allowed
to fester. The disturbing escalation we have witnessed in
extremist rhetoric, both online and offline, aims to raise
tensions, divide communities and fuel hatred. Delivering Prevent
in the best way possible is vital to strengthen our united front
against those insidious influences...
(Barnsley Central) (Lab):...Recent weeks have seen
protest activity in the UK arise from the conflict
between Israel and Hamas. There have
been displays of appalling hate and extremism on our streets by a
tiny minority. There is not, and never will be, any excuse for
inciting terrorism. The role of Prevent should not be to deal
with excuses, but to effectively counter causes of extremism and
terror-related activity, and there is more need than ever for
community trust and confidence in Prevent’s work...
...The definition of extremism has been brought into sharp focus
by the recent protest activity in the UK arising from the
conflict between Israel and Hamas. Will the
Minister update us on contact he, or his Department, have had
with the commissioner for countering extremism on definitions of
extremism since 7 October? We must counter extremism in all forms
that pose a terror threat to the public. Therefore, the Shawcross
review’s assessment of mixed, unstable and unclear ideologies is
consequential to the scope of Prevent’s interventions. For
instance, incel ideology was not identified as terrorist ideology
in the Shawcross review. Instead, it was referred to as a driver
of hate crime. Can the Minister say something about the work that
is being done by Prevent to monitor overlaps between mixed,
unstable and unclear ideologies regarded as drivers of hate
crimes and recognised terrorist ideologies? I understand if he
would prefer to write to me on those matters...
To read the whole debate, OPEN HERE
