Second reading (Commons) of the Palestine Statehood (Recognition) Bill (private bill) - Mar 17

Layla Moran (Oxford West and Abingdon) (LD)
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.

I start by drawing the attention of the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. Last September I went to Israel and parts of the occupied Palestinian territories with Liberal Democrat Friends of Israel, and two months later I went back, focusing on Palestine, with the Council for Arab-British Understanding. Mainly, I want to declare my personal interest as a British Palestinian—the first to be elected to this House, though I very much hope not the last. It is a great honour to bring this Bill to the House.

My mother comes from an old Greek Orthodox Jerusalem family. We are proud Jerusalemites and proud Palestinians. Her grandfather was called Wassef Jawharriyeh, and he chronicled what life was like in unique diaries that now act as source material for historians. He told of a Jerusalem where Christians, Muslims and Jews lived side by side in friendship and respect. But those relationships faltered through the Nakba and we ended up, like so many, having to flee our beloved city.

My grandfather George would tell tales of how when he was a boy, after the bombing of the King David Hotel in 1948, the family sought sanctuary at the Mount of the Temptation in Jericho and lived there for six months. It seems fitting that, as the MP for Oxford West and Abingdon, my constituents also include the people of Jericho, albeit Jericho, Oxford. Above all, my mother would describe the physical and mental suffering and what it was like to be a dispossessed refugee. Those feelings have never left her, nor her brothers nor her sisters. I take it upon myself, as the next generation, to carry Jerusalem in my heart and do whatever I can to safeguard Palestine’s future.

This Bill does what it says on the tin: it asks the British Government to recognise the state of Palestine, but to do so without any preconditions. In the scant time I have today, I want to make the case for why.

We must remember that it was Britain that produced the 1917 Balfour declaration; you will recall, Mr Deputy Speaker, that while Balfour spoke of a national homeland for the Jews in Palestine, he also spoke about safeguarding the

“civil and religious rights of…non-Jewish communities”.

He was, however, silent on the question of Palestinian political rights. As such, the declaration was an historic aberration, one that—whether we like it or not—altered reality in the region and played a significant part in this story, where peace has never seemed more elusive.

On that note, the timing of this Bill could not be more apt. Year after year since the demise of the Oslo Accords, the situation in Palestine has gone from bad to worse—although the current Israeli Government, led by Mr Netanyahu and whose Cabinet includes convicted criminals, are deeply problematic. Those politicians pose an existential threat to Israel as a democracy as they try to emasculate the judiciary, and I have been heartened to see the protests both in the UK and in Israel on that point.

Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab)
I congratulate the hon. Lady on her Bill and I hope that it makes some progress. She is right about the preconditions, particularly when the Government in Israel are effectively now annexing the occupied territories. Given that the House has voted for recognition and the Government have said that they support recognition, although not when, there must be recognition without preconditions, as she said. It cannot form part of the negotiations, otherwise Israel and Palestine will be on different bases. We can define the borders of Israel only by defining the borders of Palestine, and we must recognise both countries equally.

Layla Moran
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. I simply ask: if not now, when? What are we waiting for?

The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
I congratulate the hon. Lady on bringing forward the Bill. On the back of the comments of the hon. Member for Hammersmith (Andy Slaughter), who knows a lot about the subject, I will say that we are clear that we want to see the creation of a sovereign, independent and viable Palestinian state that lives in peace and security, side by side with Israel. In our view, now is not the time to take that step, but recognising a Palestinian state is a powerful diplomatic tool that we will deploy when it best serves the objectives of peace.

Layla Moran
May I thank the Minister for his work? I will keep trying to convince him that the time is now.

This Israeli Government are different from the others. The others would sit by and allow the settlements to happen—illegal settlements that should not be happening—but it is now the Israeli Government’s policy to expand those settlements. I ask the Minister to look at what happened two weeks ago in Huwara, where violent settler groups ransacking the village were egged on by Cabinet Ministers in Israel. That cannot be allowed to continue.

We need to focus on the settlements, because those encampments have led to huge tensions. Palestinian people, especially young people, are increasingly despondent and desperate. Settlement proliferation acts like a woodworm that riddles the foundations of any peace process or viable Palestinian state. The international community, frankly, sits on its hands. There is occasional condemnation, but my question to the Government and other Governments is, “What are you actually going to do about it?” It is no longer enough just to tweet about it. We must do something.

Aaron Bell (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Con)
The hon. Lady speaks with huge personal and family knowledge, as she said, and it is good that she has brought that to the House. I was going to make the same point as the Minister, but I add that we learned the lesson in the previous Parliament that it should not be for Parliament to circumscribe the diplomatic position of this country. If her party has learned any lessons from what happened in the last Parliament, I urge it to allow the Government of the day, which may change from time to time, to make such decisions based on their diplomatic impressions of the situation. I support the Minister in what he said.

Layla Moran
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. I think that Parliament has a place in encouraging Ministers to do that, and I would be delighted if the Government changed their mind as a result.

On borders, which are important, many people ask what the point of the Bill is if we do not yet have negotiated borders. First, I say that that applies equally to Israel, because the borders are also Israel’s, but that has not stopped us from recognising the state of Israel. More importantly, however, the Bill offers that most precious thing—hope. I reflect that, from where I stand wearing my keffiyeh, as a British-Palestinian woman in a still functioning democracy, I feel privileged to be able to raise the issue in Parliament, but I also think about the life I might have had living under occupation, as many of my mother’s relations are living. I should say that I found little support for the Palestinian Authority there. All people have an issue with their Government, as do the Palestinians and the Israelis who are out protesting, but that is different from statehood.

The settlements are eating up what used to be the treasured jewels in the Palestinian crown, such as Hebron. I visited it in November. It used to be a bustling market town and just a few years ago people had to wear headgear because there are settlement houses all along the market and people would throw metal objects down. Instead, a grate was installed, so now people are sheltered by an oppressive grate. The settlers got wind of this and so instead of throwing metal objects they now throw faeces and occasionally acid.

In the same town, there are metal gates that stop Palestinians walking from one street to the next. I think back to the 1940s and look at the pictures now and it reminds me of a kind of dystopian, impoverished country. Just on the other side is Tel Aviv, which is prospering mightily. I do not begrudge Israel its success; I have said in the House before that I am a daughter of Palestine but I am also a friend of Israel. What is the point of a friendship if we are not occasionally critical? Every friendship must also have boundaries. The Bill urges the Government to set some, and it would also say to Netanyahu, Ben-Gvir, Smotrich and all those who might believe that Israeli aggression is justified that we do not accept their flagrant flouting of international law. Instead, we want to give hope to Palestinians.

The Bill is simple. It would confer full diplomatic status on the Palestinian ambassador in the UK and makes reference to the 1967 borders as defined by the UN resolutions. I do not pretend that that would be a silver bullet: I am not naive. This is not going to fix the problem. Concerted international effort will help with that and we also need to strengthen the hand of particularly the Palestinians when the negotiated settlement comes. But I would also ask why we are allowing illegal settlement goods into this country, when we know the effect that the illegal settlements are having on the future of a viable Palestinian state. If the settlements are illegal, why are the goods allowed? That is not what the Bill addresses, but I urge the Government to consider that there are consequences without action, and there needs to be some action.

The Bill would encourage other countries to follow in our stead. It would encourage them to follow the other 138 countries that have recognised Palestine, including Sweden, and it would also right some of the historic wrong that was done by Balfour 100 years ago.

There is also a practical consideration. Recognition is fundamental to Palestine becoming a full UN member state, and as such it would then be allowed to raise its own funds through the IMF and the World Bank, rather than relying on international aid and tax pay-backs from the Israeli authorities, which are often withheld for no good reason. UN membership needs Security Council backing of course, but let us imagine the effect that recognition of Palestine might have, particularly on America, our closest ally.

When I was in Israel and Palestine, I heard time and again on both sides how important economic security was. We are now in a dire state. Many speak of the dangers of a third intifada. There have been 80 Palestinians and 15 Israelis killed in community violence this year alone. The Bill would start a process.

For years Jews around the world yearned for a state of their own, a place where they could feel safe and secure, and they got that self-determination through the state of Israel. That is not in question, but it is only fair, just and right that the same can happen now for the Palestinians. We do not have a place where we feel secure. We do not have a place of safety. We do not have our own state, and we should. In the interim, and in the absence of a viable peace process, I believe that we should, above all, give the Palestinians the ability to help themselves. There is no one thing that will fix this problem. There is no one act that would erase the last 100 years. From the point of view of my family, all we really want is somewhere to point to and call home—that is what I want for my children and grandchildren. I am deeply concerned that that will no longer be able to happen.

The Bill says that this Parliament believes in a Palestinian state, that we stand by the Palestinian people, that Britain respects its historic obligation to the region and that this Government will do everything they can to help safeguard both states—the state of Israel as well as the state of Palestine. I end by thanking those Members who are here to witness this and the Minister for listening. I hope that all those who are watching at home can see that there is great interest in this topic—

14:30:00

The debate stood adjourned (Standing Order No. 11(2)).