Joan Ryan (Enfield North) (Lab) I beg to move, That
this House has considered incitement in the Palestinian education
system. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship,
Sir Christopher. The conflict between Israel and the
Palestinians provokes strong passions and much disagreement on all
sides of the debate. Wherever we...Request free trial
-
(Enfield North) (Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered incitement in the Palestinian
education system.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir
Christopher.
The conflict between Israel and the Palestinians provokes
strong passions and much disagreement on all sides of the
debate. Wherever we stand, I hope we can all agree that to
bring that tragic conflict to a close, it is vital that old
hatreds and prejudices are not passed on to new generations
of children and young people. That is why I requested this
debate.
I unreservedly support a two-state solution and I believe
that a strong and competent Palestinian Authority have an
important part to play in achieving that goal.
-
(Henley) (Con)
I am sorry to interrupt the right hon. Lady just after she
has started, but she made an excellent point. Has she
noticed, as I have, that textbooks for Palestinian children
contain the phrase that cities in Israel such as Tel Aviv are
in occupied Palestine? That goes completely against the
two-state solution.
-
I cannot but agree with the hon. Gentleman. There are some
terrible examples of what appears in the textbooks, which I
will come to shortly.
Given Britain’s long-standing advocacy of the two-state
solution, I believe it is appropriate for us to provide aid
to the Palestinian Authority, but as is recognised in the
memorandum of understanding between the Department for
International Development and the PA, and the partnership
principles that underpin it, British aid is not a blank
cheque. Crucially, it demands that the PA adhere to the
principles of non-violence and respect for human rights, and
requires DFID to take action when they do not.
-
Dame (Liverpool, Riverside)
(Lab/Co-op)
Is my right hon. Friend concerned that the textbooks she
talks about call on children to
“annihilate the remnants of the foreigners”,
as well as talking about sacrificing blood? They call on
young children to believe that “death is a privilege”. Does
she believe that that kind of teaching to very young children
is compatible with seeking co-existence?
-
I do not believe it is compatible with seeking co-existence;
to warp the minds of young children is a serious form of
child abuse.
-
(Dudley North) (Lab)
Will the right hon. Lady give way?
-
For the last time, I think, yes I will.
-
We find extremists and people who foster hatred in all
communities on all sides of all conflicts. What worries me
about this is that some of the material is in books that are
officially sanctioned by the Palestinian Authority. Is the
answer not to use more of Britain’s aid budget to promote
projects that bring young people together, such as the Middle
East Entrepreneurs of Tomorrow project that I have visited in
Jerusalem, where young Israelis and young Palestinians work
together, co-operate and discuss the issues? Is that not a
building block for the peace process that we all want to see?
-
My hon. Friend is right. There is no question that
co-existence projects work. They are crucial in building that
constituency for peace and in demonstrating that Palestinians
and Israelis can live alongside each other.
-
(Strangford) (DUP)
Will the right hon. Lady give way?
-
(Birmingham, Northfield)
(Lab)
rose—
-
I will give way one more time, to the hon. Member for
Strangford (Jim Shannon). That is going to be it.
-
I congratulate the right hon. Lady on bringing this debate
forward. Does she agree that texts for a science class
phrased as has been described can do nothing other than teach
hatred? Does she agree that we should use all the diplomatic
pressure available to press for textbooks that teach facts
and methods, not hatred and rage?
-
Absolutely. It is completely indefensible that officially
sanctioned textbooks used in school and sanctioned by the
Palestinian Authority contain material that is really harmful
to children. It certainly does not bode well for building
peace.
-
Will my right hon. Friend give way?
-
I will make a little bit of progress and will come back to my
hon. Friend—I do not want to leave out the last person who
wants to intervene.
There are many instances where the PA have clearly and
repeatedly flouted the principles I referred to. Perhaps most
egregious is its payment of salaries to those who commit
terrorist attacks—a truly grotesque policy that further
incentivises violence by rewarding those who are serving the
longest sentences, and thus have committed the most heinous
acts, with the highest payments. The official PA media are
also saturated with vile anti-Semitism and the glorification
of those who commit acts of violence against Jews.
I fail, for instance, to see how children’s television
programmes in which poems are recited that refer to Jews as
“barbaric monkeys”, “wretched pigs” and the “most evil among
creations” do anything to advance the cause of peace,
reconciliation and co-existence. Neither do I view the naming
of summer camps and sports tournaments after so-called
martyrs who murder Israeli schoolchildren as in any way
conducive to furthering a two-state solution.
I confine my remarks today, however, to the question of
incitement in the Palestinian education system in general and
the new PA school curriculum in particular. In 2016 and 2017,
the PA published a reformed curriculum covering both primary
and secondary school students. It represented the most
substantial revision of the curriculum since the
establishment of the PA in the wake of the Oslo accords. As
the Institute for Monitoring Peace and Cultural Tolerance in
School Education outlined in a series of reports, the new
curriculum represents a significant step backwards. Based on
standards for peace and tolerance derived from UNESCO and UN
declarations, it found that the new curriculum
“exerts pressure over young Palestinians to acts of violence
in a more extensive and sophisticated manner”
and has expanded its focus
“from demonization of Israel to providing a rationale for
war.”
It is
“more radical than ever, purposefully and strategically
encouraging Palestinian children to sacrifice themselves to
martyrdom.”
The incitement is pernicious and pervades subjects across the
curriculum and across every age group. Children of 13 are
taught Newton’s second law through the image of a boy with a
slingshot targeting soldiers. For the avoidance of any doubt,
I have here the textbook and can show hon. Members the
relevant photograph. The evidence is not difficult to come
across. Children of 10 are asked to calculate the number of
martyrs in Palestinian uprisings in a maths textbook, and I
have that here too.
-
Sir (in the
Chair)
Order. I would advise the right hon. Lady that it is not
possible to use exhibits. Apart from anything else, how is
that to be recorded in Hansard? The right hon. Lady should
use her expertise and education to describe in words, rather
than use exhibits.
-
Thank you for your guidance, Sir Christopher. I shall abide
by it.
Children of 11 are told that martyrdom and jihad are the
“most important meanings of life”.
They are taught that
“drinking the cup of bitterness with glory is much sweeter
than a pleasant long life accompanied by humiliation”.
To ram home that terrible lesson, martyrs such as Dalal
Mughrabi—who led the infamous 1978 coastal road massacre in
which 38 Israelis, including 13 children, were brutally
murdered—are held up as role models. Let us be absolutely
clear. This is, as Hillary Clinton once suggested, a form of
child abuse: teaching children to hate, to kill and to
sacrifice their own lives. Palestinian children deserve so
much better than to be taught that the best they can aspire
to in life is death.
Those are just a few of the dozens and dozens of examples of
incitement that litter Palestinian schoolbooks. Less obvious,
but no less malign, is the fact that the curriculum continues
to suggest that Jerusalem’s al-Aqsa mosque is under threat.
That false and incendiary claim has frequently triggered
violence. The curriculum offers no education for peacemaking
with Israel or any suggestion that the path of peace is
preferred to the path of violence. It implicitly argues that
Palestinians will return to a pre-1967 Israel through
violence. For instance, it teaches nine-year-olds the
necessity of “sacrificing blood”, “eliminating the usurper”
and annihilating the “remnants of the foreigners”.
-
I thank my right hon. Friend for her generosity in giving
way once again.
“Building a house is like killing 100 Arabs. Building a
whole settlement is like killing 10,000 non-Jews.”
Those are the words of settler leader Moshe Zar, not at an
unofficial gathering but at an official Israeli Ministry of
Education event, and reported in Ynetnews. Does that not
indicate that incitement exists on both sides and has to be
tackled on both sides? Was not the suggestion made in 2014
of a tripartite committee to look at all incitement,
involving the PA and the Israeli Government and chaired by
the Americans, a useful way forward? Why did the Israeli
Government reject it?
-
I am not making an argument for the Israeli Government. I
have stood on a platform with Benjamin Netanyahu and said
to his face—I think my hon. Friend knows this, because I
have said it before—that I do not agree with settlement
building and that I think there should be a settlement
freeze. I think it is a barrier to peace. I do not think it
is the only barrier and I do not think it is
insurmountable, but I do not agree with it. Israeli
textbooks see peace as the ultimate goal and depict it as
highly desirable and achievable, while war is a negative,
although sometimes necessary, occurrence.
This is not some unfortunate tale about events in the
middle east, for which Britain has no responsibility.
British aid to the PA helps fund the salaries of 33,000
teachers and Ministry of Education and Higher Education
civil servants. As the Minister clearly stated in answers
to parliamentary questions I tabled in March:
“According to the Palestinian Authority…Ministry of
Education and Higher Education, all of their schools in the
West Bank are using the revised 2017 PA curriculum.”
UK-funded public servants and teachers under the Ministry
of Education and Higher Education are therefore involved in
the implementation process. Moreover, as the former
Secretary of State for International Development, the right
hon. Member for Witham (Priti Patel), stated in
correspondence with me last year:
“The MOU...includes a commitment from the PA to take action
against incitement to violence, including addressing
allegations of incitement in the education curriculum.”
I first brought the new curriculum to Ministers’ attention
last September. With my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley
North (Ian Austin), who is here today, and my hon. Friend
the Member for Barrow and Furness (John Woodcock), I wrote
to the International Development Secretary and the Prime
Minister, whose intolerance of extremism does not appear to
extend to her own Government’s expenditure. Since then, the
Government have blustered, prevaricated and delayed. They
first dismissed the objectivity of the IMPACT-se report.
They then claimed that IMPACT-se was, in part, basing its
view of the curriculum on a report published three years
before the new curriculum was introduced. Seven months on,
they announced that they would conduct their own
independent assessment of the Palestinian curriculum. The
net result is that Palestinian children have been served up
this diet of hate for another year.
Given that a new set of school textbooks will be
distributed in September, the Government’s review risks
being out of date by the time it is completed. The big
reforms introduced last year mean that those books are
likely to contain very few changes. However, that will
still allow the PA to argue that there are new books— a
tactic they have successfully deployed with international
donors in the past. I simply cannot understand why
Ministers have been so slow and reluctant to confront the
Palestinian Authority. We could and should have prevented
this by saying, “No,” and stopping the cheques. It really
was not a hard call.
In the time the Government have been stalling, the European
Union has passed legislation requiring that all teaching
and training programmes financed through EU funds, such as
PEGASE, must reflect common values such as peace, freedom,
tolerance and non-discrimination within education. The
legislation
“asks the Commission to ensure that European funds are
spent in line with Unesco-derived standards of peace and
tolerance in education”.
Once again, I urge the Government to take action. First,
they should suspend all aid to the PA that directly or
indirectly finances those teaching and implementing this
curriculum until the PA commit to wholesale and urgent
revisions of it. Secondly, I have suggested previously that
Britain cut its aid to the PA by 14%—double the percentage
of the PA budget that is used to pay terrorist salaries—and
invest that money in a Palestinian peace fund aimed at
young people. It would support education projects in
Palestine not tarnished by the PA’s anti-Semitism. While
money that would have paid the salaries of teachers and
Education Ministry public servants remains suspended, it
can be redirected into that fund. I am suggesting not a cut
in the funding but a change in where it goes. Palestinian
children and young people must not suffer due to the acts
of their leaders.
Finally, given that the UK is so heavily invested in
education, we must ensure that we monitor far more closely
what is going on in Palestinian classrooms. I urge that, in
keeping with new legislation being considered by the United
States, the Secretary of State for International
Development be required to issue a written statement to the
International Development Committee each year to confirm
that she is satisfied that the content in the PA curriculum
does not encourage or incite violence, that it conforms
with standards for peace and tolerance derived from the
UNESCO declarations, and that no UK aid is being used
directly or indirectly to fund educational materials that
do not meet those standards.
I recognise that the Government have decided to conduct
their own review, so I request that the Minister addresses
the following questions in his response. In their
correspondence with me, the Minister and the Prime Minister
have emphasised that the Government regularly engage with
the PA on issues of incitement. First, will the Minister
give us two or three concrete examples of action taken by
the PA, as a result of that engagement, to curb incitement?
Secondly, will he tell us when the DFID review will be
completed? Will he agree to place a copy of it in the
Library of the House?
Thirdly, will the Minister confirm that, as IMPACT-se did,
the DFID review will examine every page of every PA
textbook through the prism of defined methodologies? I have
a list of 133 textbooks, which I am happy to furnish him
with. When the review is completed, will he place in the
Library a list of all the textbooks that DFID officials
examined? Fourthly, will he confirm that the DFID review is
being given access to the full curriculum?
Fifthly, I know the Minister will wish to ensure that the
DFID review is stringent, robust and evidence-based. Will
he therefore confirm that DFID’s methodologies, like those
deployed by IMPACT-se, make reference to or are in
accordance with articles 1, 4.2 and 5 of the declaration of
the principles on tolerance proclaimed and signed by the
member states of UNESCO on 16 November 1995; principles 1,
2, 3, 4 and 5 of the UN declaration on the promotion among
youth of the ideals of peace, mutual respect and
understanding between peoples, signed in 1965; and articles
9 and 18 of the integrated framework for action on
education for peace, human rights and democracy, approved
by the general conference of UNESCO at its 28th session in
Paris in November 1995? Finally, will the Minister
undertake to place in the Library of the House a copy of
the research methodologies that DFID’s review is utilising?
It is highly regrettable that the Government have
effectively made British taxpayers complicit in the
delivery of this curriculum of hate. We must stop funding
this incitement to violence and terror; we must cease
subsidising this abuse of Palestinian children and young
people; and we must do so before young minds are poisoned,
thus perpetuating a tragic conflict that has gone on for
far too long.
4.19 pm
-
The Minister for the Middle East (Alistair Burt)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir
Christopher, as always.
I thank the right hon. Member for Enfield North (Joan Ryan)
for securing the debate. I shall not be able to answer all
her questions this afternoon. The time I had available to
prepare was cut short because earlier in the main Chamber I
had to deal with an urgent question about the demolition of
Khan al-Ahmar. Some Members present were there for that, but
not everyone. I am afraid that it ate into my time, so I have
not been able to do as much preparation as I would have
liked. None the less, I am grateful to her for raising a
subject that is, across the House, of considerable interest
and concern, which is shared by me and all Ministers.
The UK strongly condemns all forms of violence and incitement
on both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We
continue to urge the Israeli and Palestinian leaderships to
avoid engaging in or encouraging any type of action and
language that makes a culture of peaceful co-existence and a
negotiated solution to the conflict more difficult to
achieve. Nowhere are the values of peace and tolerance more
important than in education.
It was perfectly right and proper for the right hon. Lady to
cite a series of examples. None of them was justifiable, and
the United Kingdom would not seek to justify them in any way,
but we have discussed such matters too many times in this
place, and too many attitudes are born out of the conflict’s
history and context, making them difficult to escape. None
the less, if a future generation is to have the opportunities
that we want for it, that will have to start in schools—all
the schools, and all the teaching of those who go to school.
As I mentioned earlier, one of my concerns is that over time
the distance between young people and others, between
Israelis and Palestinians, is harder than it used to be,
because of the length of time the conflict has gone on and
because of a hardening of attitudes on all sides. We have to
start with that, but we have to see what we can do about such
an important issue.
In May, in Ramallah, I raised incitement with the Palestinian
Education Minister in a meeting about the UK’s future support
to the Palestinian Authority. To give the right hon. Lady the
concrete example she is looking for, I sat across a desk from
the Education Minister and asked him about incitement in
textbooks. We talked about what to do and he answered me. It
is that direct—straightforwardly, with a colleague. I shall
move on to what we will do in a moment, but British officials
hold similar conversations with other Palestinian
counterparts, so it is done and it is done directly. The
Education Minister welcomed the prospect of an independent
international review of Palestinian textbooks and assured me
that the Palestinian Ministry of Education and Higher
Education would take seriously the findings of any such
review. I shall move on to that in more detail in a moment.
The UK is a long-term supporter of Palestinian education.
Last year UK aid helped up to 24,000 Palestinian children in
the west bank go to school. I saw for myself the positive
impact of our money on the lives of just a few of those boys
and girls during my recent visit. The children I met at an
elementary school in Ramallah showed me with pride their
school garden and artwork, and told me about their hopes and
aspirations for the future—to be doctors, engineers and
teachers. They need our help to have a fair chance of making
those dreams a reality. They are the peace-builders of
tomorrow, and that is why it is vital that the UK and other
international partners support them.
Our continued support will come with a continued strong
challenge to the Palestinian Authority on education sector
incitement. Let me be very clear: education has no place for
materials or practices that incite young minds towards
violence. I have seen the reports expressing concern about
the content of new Palestinian textbooks, and I take the
findings of those reports seriously. Our response must be
rigorous, evidence-based and made in the company of other
international supporters of the Palestinian education system,
in order to ensure that the Palestinian Authority hear a
strong, credible and unified voice about what must be done so
that their textbooks support peace and do not incite
violence.
That is why we are in the final stages of discussions to
establish an independent textbook review jointly with other
donors. The plan at the moment is for the review to be
completed by September 2019. Department for International
Development officials have begun preparation for that
independent review. It will be evidence-based and rigorous,
to ensure that the Palestinian Authority hear that strong,
credible voice. In the interim, we shall continue to express
concern about incitement with the PA.
A specific concern was the new pilot textbooks, which is why
they are the most appropriate focus for analysis and our
immediate work with the PA. Separately, we are interested in
the role that education can play in promoting tolerance and
inclusion. We shall, accordingly, look at other aspects of
the education system, including the broader curriculum.
Why are we seeking a joint review instead of doing it
ourselves? We think that joining up with other donors will
provide a rigorous analysis of Palestinian textbooks and a
unified voice from the international community about what the
PA need to do. That will also deliver value for money and
avoid the risk of two different analyses from competing
authorities.
I did have one concern when the right hon. Lady mentioned the
review. She suggested that in some quarters the review of the
Institute for Monitoring Peace and Cultural Tolerance in
School Education was disregarded, but I too was concerned at
some of the findings. The Department has met IMPACT-se to
investigate further, but we thought that an objective review
was also necessary—it is right to have done that.
In answer to the hon. Member for Dudley North (Ian Austin) on
co-existence, as I think the House knows, I value such
projects very much. Some are proceeding at the moment with £3
million in support, but we might well have more in future. I
have listened to the right hon. Lady, the hon. Gentleman and
indeed the hon. Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Richard
Burden) on that, because if such co-existence projects are to
work, they must come with support from all sides. There is
more that we can do, and that is important.
Our ambition for inclusive education must be much greater
than simply to ensure that textbooks do not incite violence.
To contribute towards a just and lasting peace, we must
promote positive portrayals of others to instil the values of
peace and tolerance in the minds of young people. That is why
the UK will continue to seek ways of ensuring that our
current and future support for education brings young people
together to build confidence, trust and understanding across
communities.
To conclude, I reiterate that the UK condemns incitement in
all its forms. I shall continue to raise the issue directly
with the leadership of the Palestinian Authority, both during
and upon conclusion of the textbook review. I shall also
continue to encourage positive portrayals of others on both
sides of the conflict, because that is vital to deliver a
two-state solution that will lead to a just and lasting
peace.
To repeat one or two of the things that I said in the earlier
debate, a lasting and just peace is based not only on words
but on actions. Actions that are detrimental to a two-state
solution and look likely to make it more difficult will be
condemned by the United Kingdom Government—we do make such
condemnations, such as that of the demolition of Khan
al-Ahmar, which started earlier today. On both sides of the
conflict, things are done that make peace more difficult.
Incitement is wrong and should not be any part of the
situation. Each party to the conflict, whether Hamas pushing
people towards the fence to be killed or those involved in
actions likely to make a two-state solution more difficult,
bears responsibility for the peace we need in the future.
This House is clear in its determination that a two-state
solution is the only viable future. We have to continue to be
clear and determined about that. We have to ensure that those
we talk to know that we mean it seriously. Removing
incitement will play a key part, and it cannot be ignored by
those who may think that the experience of occupation is so
severe that in some places it can be condoned. No, incitement
cannot and will not be condoned. We will be clear about
speaking out on everything that gives rise to the
perpetuation of a conflict that, as the right hon. Lady
concluded, has gone on for far too long.
Question put and agreed to.
|