UKPOL.CO.UK

Category: Foreign Affairs

  • Yvette Cooper – 2026 Comments on the Death of Alexei Navalny

    Yvette Cooper – 2026 Comments on the Death of Alexei Navalny

    The comments made by Yvette Cooper, the Foreign Secretary, on 14 February 2026.

    Since Yulia Navalnaya announced the loss of her husband here in Munich two years ago, the UK has pursued the truth of Alexei Navalny’s death with fierce determination

    “Only the Russian Government had the means, motive and opportunity to deploy this lethal toxin against Alexei Navalny during his imprisonment in Russia.

    Today, beside his widow, the UK is shining a light on the Kremlin’s barbaric plot to silence his voice.

    Russia saw Navalny as a threat. By using this form of poison the Russian state demonstrated the despicable tools it has at its disposal and the overwhelming fear it has of political opposition.

  • Keir Starmer – 2026 Speech at the Munich Security Conference

    Keir Starmer – 2026 Speech at the Munich Security Conference

    The speech made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, on 14 February 2026.

    For many years, for most people in the United Kingdom, war has been remote. Something that concerns us deeply, but which happens far off.

    But now we feel the solidity of peace, the very ground of peace now softening under our feet. It is the job of leaders to be ahead of these seismic shifts. Yet that is against the grain of history.

    Time and again, leaders have looked the other way, only re-arming when disaster is upon them. This time, it must be different. Because all of the warning signs are there.

    Russia has proved its appetite for aggression, bringing terrible suffering to the Ukrainian people. 

    Its hyper-threats extend across our continent, not just threatening our security, but tearing at our social order. 

    Collaborating with populists to undermine our values. Using disinformation to sow division. Using cyber-attacks and sabotage to disrupt our lives and deepening the cost-of-living crisis.

    It is true that Russia has made a huge strategic blunder in Ukraine, and the Russian casualties number well over a million. But even as the war goes on, Russia is re-arming, reconstituting their armed forces, an industrial base. 

    NATO has warned that Russia could be ready to use military force against the Alliance by the end of this decade. In the event of a peace deal in Ukraine, which we are all working hard to achieve, Russia’s re-armament would only accelerate.

    The wider danger to Europe would not end there. It would increase. So we must answer this threat in full.

    At the outset, it is important to be prepared. We do not seek conflict. Our objective is lasting peace, a return to strategic stability, and the rule of law.

    And in the face of these threats, there is only one viable option. 

    Now, to break the convention of a house of speeches, we are not at a crossroads. The road ahead is straight and it is clear.

    We must build our hard power, because that is the currency of the age. We must be able to deter aggression. And yes, if necessary, we must be ready to fight.

    To do whatever it takes to protect our people, our values, and our way of life. And as Europe, we must stand on our own two feet. And that means being bold.

    It means putting away petty politics and short-term concerns. It means acting together to build a stronger Europe and a more European NATO, underpinned by deeper links between the UK and the EU, across defence, industry, tech, politics, and the wider economy. Because these are the foundations on which our security and prosperity will rest.

    This is how we will build a better future for our continent. True to the vibrant, free, diverse societies that we represent, showing that people who look different to each other can live peacefully together. But this isn’t against the tenor of our times.

    Rather, it’s what makes us strong, as we’re prepared to defend it with everything that we have.

    And we are not the Britain of the Brexit years anymore.

    Because we know that in a dangerous world, we would not take control by turning in.  We would surrender. 

    And I won’t let that happen. That’s why I devote time as Prime Minister to Britain’s leadership on the world stage.

    And that’s why I’m here today. Because I am clear, there is no British security without Europe, and no European security without Britain. That is the lesson of history, and is today’s reality as well.

    So together we must rise to this moment. We must spend more, deliver more, and coordinate more.

    And crucially, we must do this with the United States.

    The US remains an indispensable power. Its contribution to European security over 80 years is unparalleled. And so is our gratitude.

    At the same time, we recognise that things are changing. The US National Security Strategy  spells out that Europe must take primary responsibility for its own defence. That is the new law.

    Now, there have been a series of thoughtful interventions about what this means, including the argument that we’re at a moment of rupture. 

    Now, I would agree that the world has changed fundamentally, and that we must find new ways to uphold our values and the rule of law. But in responding to that, we must not disregard everything that has sustained us for the last 80 years.

    That could be a moment of destruction. And instead, I believe, we must make this a moment of creation. Instead of a moment of rupture, we must make it one of radical renewal.

    So, rather than pretending that we can simply replace all US capabilities, we should focus on diversifying and decreasing some dependencies. We should deliver generational investment that moves us from over-dependence to interdependence. I’m talking about a vision of European security and greater European autonomy.

    It does not herald US withdrawal, but answers the call for more burden-sharing in Europe and remake the ties that have served us so well. Because we know the value of our own power. The nature of our power is at the core of human decision.

    It achieved something that leaders have been trying to do for centuries. From Westphalia to the Congress of Vienna to Versailles. After centuries of conflict, the founders of NATO finally united our continents in peace and security.

    Our militaries, that once faced each other on the battlefield, now stand side-by-side, pledged to each other’s defence. It is a shield over our heads every single day. And whilst some on the extremes of our politics chip away at this alliance, we defend it.

    I am proud that my party fought for NATO’s creation. While our then Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin called it a spiritual union of the West. And we’ve shown our fidelity to that idea, asserting each other’s sovereignty, as we did on Greenland.

    And crucially, coming to each other’s aid under Article 5. We fought together in Afghanistan, at terrible cost to many in my country and across many allied countries. And so I say to all NATO members, our commitment to Article 5 is as profound now as ever. And be in no doubt, if called on, the UK would come to your aid today.

    Instead, we must move forward together to create a more European NATO. As I see it, Europe is a sleeping giant. Our economies dwarf Russia more than ten times over.

    We have huge defence capabilities, yet too often this adds up to less than the sum of its parts. Fragmented industrial planning and procurement have led to gaps in some areas, and massive duplication in others. 

    Europe has over 20 types of frigate, and 10 types of fighter jet. We have over 10 types of main battle tank, whilst the US has one. It’s wildly inefficient, and it harms our collective security. The US security umbrella has allowed these bad habits to develop. But now we must break them. 

    And we have shown that we can coordinate in great effect, as was just set out. Supporting Ukraine in a way that Putin never really imagined. Creating the Coalition of the Willing, which now covers almost all of Europe, as well as Canada and our friends in the Asia-Pacific. And going further in our support, with the UK announcing over £500 million this week for more air defence for the Ukrainian people. To meet the wider threat, it is clear that we are going to have to spend more faster. 

    And we have shown our collective intent in this regard as well. With the historic agreement to increase spending to 5% on security and defence. And we are prepared to explore innovative solutions. So we are stepping up work with like-minded allies on options for a collective approach to defence financing, to help accelerate this vital investment.

    And as we increase spending, we must use it to its full potential. We must come together to integrate our capabilities on spending and procurement and build a joint European defence industry. I welcome the steps that we have taken so far, which could allow us to participate in the £90 billion Euro loan to Ukraine.

    I hope we can work together like this going forward. Because, look, the logic of defence is solidarity and collective effort, not market access. 

    In a crisis, our citizens expect us to be ready. So we need to deliver a step change in collaboration. 

    And I am proud of the work we are already doing together. Delivering cutting-edge drones with Ukraine. Developing next-generation long-range missiles with Germany, Italy and France. Working with our JEF allies to protect our northern flank.

    Doubling our deployment of British commandos in the Arctic. Taking control of NATO’s Atlantic and Northern Command in Norfolk, Virginia. And transforming our Royal Navy by striking the biggest warship deal in British history with Norway.

    We are building a fleet of warships to hunt Russian submarines and protect undersea infrastructure. We want to replicate this level of collaboration with other allies across the High North and the Baltics. 

    And I can announce today that the UK will deploy our Carrier Strike Group to the North Atlantic and the High North this year led by HMS Prince of Wales, operating alongside the US, Canada and other NATO allies in a powerful show of our commitment to Euro-Atlantic security.

    That is also why we are enhancing our nuclear cooperation with France. For decades the UK has been the only nuclear power in Europe to commit its deterrent to protect all NATO members. But now any adversary must know that in a crisis they could be confronted by our combined strength.

    It shows beyond doubt how vital it is that we work together. So, we must also look at what more we can do with the EU. 

    We must go beyond the historic steps that we took at last year’s UK-EU summit to build the formidable productive power and innovative strength that we need. British companies already account for over a quarter of the continent’s defence industrial base. 

    They are a job-creating, community-building machine employing around 239,000 people across the UK, including in Wales, where this month we’re launching the first of five regional defence-grade deals.

    We want to bring our leadership in defence, tech and AI together with Europe to multiply our strengths and build a shared industrial base across our continent which could turbocharge our defence production. 

    That requires leadership. To drive greater coherence and coordination across Europe. That is what we’re doing with Germany and France in the E3, working closely with EU partners, particularly Italy and Poland as well as with Norway, Canada and Turkey. 

    So my message today is the United Kingdom is ready. We see the imperative. We see the urgency. We want to work together to lead a generational shift in defence industrial cooperation. 

    Now this includes looking again at closer economic alignment.

    We are already aligned with the single market in some areas to drive down the prices of food and energy. We are trusted partners. And as the Chancellor of the Exchequer said this week, deeper economic integration is in all of our interests.

    So we must look at where we can move closer to the single market in other sectors as well where that would work for both sides. 

    The prize here is greater security. Stronger growth for the United Kingdom and the EU, which will fuel increased defence spending and the chance to place the UK at the centre of a wave of European industrial renewal.

    I understand the politics very well. It will mean trade-offs. But the status quo is not fit for purpose.

    And to me there is no question where the national interest lies. I will always fight for what’s best for my country. 

    I started today talking about avoiding mistakes of the past like delaying action or fragmenting our efforts. 

    But there is something else. In the 1930s, leaders were too slow to level with the public about the fundamental shift in mindset that was required. 

    So we must work harder today to build consent for the decisions we must take to keep us safe. 

    Because if we don’t, the peddlers of easy answers are ready on the extremes of left and right and they will offer their solutions instead. 

    It’s striking that the different ends of the spectrum share so much. Soft on Russia. Weak on NATO. If not outright opposed. And determined to sacrifice the relationship we need on the altar of their ideology.

    The future they offer is one of division and then capitulation. 

    The lamps would go out across Europe once again. But we will not let that happen.

    If we believe in our values, in democracy, liberty and the rule of law. This is the moment to stand up and to fight for them. That is why we must work together.

    And show that by taking responsibility for our own security, we will help our people look forward. Not with fear, but with determination. And with hope.

    Thank you very much.

  • Richard Hermer – 2026 Speech at the Great Synagogue in Sydney

    Richard Hermer – 2026 Speech at the Great Synagogue in Sydney

    The speech made by Richard Hermer, the Attorney General, at the Great Synagogue in Sydney on 6 February 2026.

    Rabbi Elton, Rabbi Feldman, members of the congregation – Shabbat Shalom

    Whenever and wherever I travel, I try to visit two types of venues close to my heart – courts and Shuls.  My children would say this shows I need to get out more.  I disagree, never more so than this evening – what a privilege it is to address you in this magnificent and historical Shul – which has been a centre of Australian Jewish life for almost 150 years. 

    And Australian Jewish life has been important for me and part of my Jewish identity for over 40 years.  I spent my year-off in Israel and on my very first night there met up with a group of Aussies from my same Jewish youth movement.  They became life-long friends bringing me back to these shores many times.  The bonds that we created have continued through to the next generation with both my children attending youth camps here as madrachot (youth leaders). L’dor v’dor (from generation to generation) 

    But the capacity in which I am here tonight is very different to previous years and the reason for my attendance is altogether more important and solemn. 

    I come on behalf of His Majesty’s Government of the United Kingdom and the Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer. I come to express our outrage at the terrorist attack at Bondi beach, to offer our condolences to the families of those killed and those injured to express our profound friendship and solidarity with the Jewish community of Australia as you come to terms with the horror of the attack and face the challenge of tackling modern antisemitism.

    Earlier today, not long after I arrived in Australia, I went to Bondi and stood on the green, and reflected on the horror of what had taken place there.

    Although I was appointed Attorney General only 18 months ago, tragically this is not the first time that I have spoken at Friday night services following an antisemitic terrorist attack. 

    As you will know, last Yom Kippur the Heaton Park Shul in Manchester was the subject of a dreadful terrorist attack – two people were murdered and others injured.  On the following Friday night I gave a D’var Torah at my own Shul in North London.  I spoke on behalf of the Prime Minister offering our condolences to the victims and to the British Jewish community and expressing our determination to address the rise of antisemitism.  But I also spoke as a Jew, as a member of the congregation – trying to make sense of the senseless, to articulate what this meant me, my family, my community as Jews in modern Britain – and I spoke as part of a Shabbat community the natural place to come together as one, to work through the pain, bewilderment and anger together, just as communities did across the world after 7 October.

    Hearing the news of the attack on Yom Kippur I imagine that I went through the same range of emotions as many of you felt on 14 December here in Sydney.  The first reaction is almost primal – are our family and friends safe?  Your mind spins through the list of your loved ones.  My eldest child is a student in Manchester and I knew she was planning on going to shul – I was being rushed to a national security meeting whilst trying to track her down.  Many of you no doubt were having the same agonising reactions here as the news of the horror broke.  Then immediate reaction is replaced by the flood of fear, anger and outrage at what has taken place – and the knowledge that for many families there was no reassurance that loved ones were safe, but rather calls that went unanswered and unimaginable loss.

    One sentiment that I also anticipate was shared by our two communities was the sense that although utterly shocking neither events were completely unexpected.  They gave cruel expression to our long-standing fear of the inevitable.  I have grown up in the UK normalising that our Shuls, schools and venues are by necessity protected by security for a good reason. 

    The attacks at Heaton Park and at Bondi beach took place at the other side of the globe within weeks of each other.  This reflects the unacceptable reality that there are very few places on this planet in which Jewish life exists without physical risk – it demonstrates the reach of modern antisemitism that strikes on our ability to live openly as Jews, to worship without fear and to belong wherever in the world we live, in the north, south, east or west.

    But yet – Jewish history, like the Jewish calendar is marked by the juxtaposition of not only sadness but joy, what has been called our dialectical dance – represented in myriad ways for example how we smash the glass under the chupa at weddings.

    As the late Rabbi Sacks wrote, in an essay that typically for him referenced Aristotle, Keirkegard and Robert Louis Stevenson, ‘In Judaism joy is the supreme religious emotion.  Here we are, in a world filled with beauty. Around us is the love that moves the sun and all the stars.  The soul that celebrates, sings.”

    So permit me, if short of expressing joy, in this moment of solemnity at least to seek to offer some optimistic reflections about where we find ourselves.

    The first is to remind our ourselves that even though our communities have been forced to endure these terrorist outrages, seen in our historical context this remains an extraordinary time to be jewish in our societies.  For centuries of Jewish existence, attacks on Jews would have been perpetrated by states, directly, indirectly or at best with atrocities committed whilst states and their institutions turned a blind eye.   The contrast in our era is profound – every arm of the state employed to track down and prosecute those involved in terrorist crime, a determination to root out antisemitism and to protect our communities.  The genuine heart felt expression of solidarity of our fellow citizens. 

    A few hours after the events in Manchester, the Prime Minister, Chancellor of the Exchequer and Foreign Secretary attend the Neilah service at West London Synagogue to show their solidarity with the jewish community.  Last week, for the first time in British history our Cabinet meeting was addressed by a Holocaust survivor Mala Tribich producing tears around the table. 

    And I also know from conversations with colleagues in both State and Federal Government in Australia of our shared sense of endeavour to tackle antisemitism at home and overseas and ensure that our societies are safe for jews to simply be jews – without having to look over shoulders or feel that we are not free to express our beliefs and practice our religion.  

    Secondly, I think a positive response in both our countries has been a determination that these outrages will not be used to divide communities.  We are blessed in both the UK and Australia to live in proud, tolerant and diverse nations.  The Jewish values we all grew up with recognise, indeed promote this value – that love for our fellow human beings will always outshine hatred and division.  To allow our anger to dictate another path would be to hand a victory to terrorists. What greater reflection of how, united, our communities are always stronger, is the extraordinary bravery of a Muslim father of two, a proud Australian, and a hero –  Ahmed al-Ahmed.

    In that moment, he showed something deeply human.

    A reminder of who we are, when fear doesn’t get the final say.

    That unity that is mirrored in millions of relationships across this country – deep friendships forged without regard to which God we pray to or the colour of our skin. 

    I think we should take joy in a world in which extraordinary people choose humanity over hatred, again and again and again. 

    So as we look towards the rest of 2026, we do so always mindful of the grievous loss sustained by the victims of terror, with a steely determination to root out antisemitism and intolerance in all its manifestations,  but with the Jewish spirit of believing that light will always outshine darkness. 

    Let me end where I began. To express on behalf of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom our condolences to the families of those killed an injured at Bondi Beach and our solidarity with the Australian Jewish community.

    May their memory be a blessing.

    Shabbat Shalom.

  • Yvette Cooper – 2026 Statement on Sentencing of Jimmy Lai

    Yvette Cooper – 2026 Statement on Sentencing of Jimmy Lai

    The statement made by Yvette Cooper, the Foreign Secretary, on 9 February 2026.

    British National Jimmy Lai was today sentenced to 20 years in prison in Hong Kong for exercising his right to freedom of expression, following a politically motivated prosecution. Beijing’s National Security Law was imposed on Hong Kong to silence China’s critics.

    For the 78-year-old, this is tantamount to a life sentence. I remain deeply concerned for Mr Lai’s health, and I again call on the Hong Kong authorities to end his appalling ordeal and release him on humanitarian grounds, so that he may be reunited with his family.

    The Prime Minister raised Mr Lai’s case directly with President Xi during his visit. That has opened up discussion of our most acute concerns directly with the Chinese government, at the highest levels. Following today’s sentencing we will rapidly engage further on Mr Lai’s case.

    We stand with the people of Hong Kong, and will always honour the historical commitments made under the legally binding Sino-British Joint Declaration. China must do the same.

  • Monica Harding – 2026 Speech on Sudan

    Monica Harding – 2026 Speech on Sudan

    The speech made by Monica Harding, the Liberal Democrat spokesperson on Foreign Affairs, in the House of Commons on 5 February 2026.

    The situation in Sudan is the world’s biggest humanitarian crisis. I welcome the increased funding and the sanctions, which are long overdue, but why do the sanctions still fall short of the EU action? Why do they still fail to target the heads of the SAF and the RSF? Why has it taken this long? Will the Government now target those profiting from Sudan’s gold trade, which continues to bankroll the war economy?

    Humanitarian aid must flow freely and independently. In its role as the United Nations Security Council penholder, what steps are the Government taking to secure a ceasefire so that humanitarian aid can get through, and to expand the arms embargo beyond Darfur to the whole country? Will the Government expand their aid provision and ensure that aid delivery, including from UK taxpayers in my constituency of Esher and Walton, is distributed through the UN and the international non-governmental organisations, or through localised efforts, such as the emergency response rooms, and that the UN system is not undermined?

    I welcome the steps that the UK has taken to ensure that Sudanese pro-democracy actors are not sidelined by external powerbrokers. Will she reaffirm the UK’s commitment to a civilian, non-military end state in Sudan? What is being done to prevent parallel diplomatic tracks from undermining UN-led peace efforts? Will the Government suspend arms exports to the United Arab Emirates, given credible evidence of its role in fuelling the conflict?

    What discussions had the UK held with partners to ensure that humanitarian assistance is not being used to mask responsibility? How will accountability for atrocities be safeguarded with any peace process supported by the UK, including support for international justice mechanisms, such as the International Criminal Court? The UK has a long legacy in Sudan, and with that comes responsibility. Sudan’s civilians cannot wait. I urge the Government to act with ever more urgency and focus.

    Yvette Cooper

    I thank the hon. Member for her commitment to reaching peace in Sudan and her comments on the horrendous nature of the crisis. The sanctions that we have now issued bring us broadly in line with the EU. The US has gone further, so we are continuing to look at the issues. We are seeking to link our sanctions to the evidence on atrocities, to the evidence on arms flows and, crucially, to the peace process and the peace discussions that we want to take place.

    I agree with the hon. Member about the importance of the UN. A few weeks ago, I met the UN Secretary General and the UN emergency co-ordinator, Tom Fletcher, to discuss Sudan and the importance of the work that the UN is doing. The UN is in close touch with the Quad on these discussions and is pressing for much greater humanitarian access. We certainly need to move towards a civilian Government. We need a political transition and a process to get there, but that has to start with a humanitarian truce. We have to start by silencing the guns and, as part of that, we need an end to the arms flows. I have seen evidence of a whole series of countries being involved in the arms flows to different sides, and we need action against that.

  • Priti Patel – 2026 Speech on Sudan

    Priti Patel – 2026 Speech on Sudan

    The speech made by Priti Patel, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, in the House of Commons on 5 February 2026.

    The situation in Sudan is serious and deadly, and Members across the Chamber want this awful, barbaric war to end. Millions are suffering, displaced and malnourished, and an estimated 150,000 people have been killed, including in massacres such as El Fasher. War crimes are being committed, and appalling acts of sexual violence are being perpetrated against women and girls. UK leadership is needed to make a difference to the humanitarian situation on the ground, and to support every international diplomatic effort to end this awful and deadly conflict.

    I must ask the Foreign Secretary, however, how she can come to the House to talk about such barbaric sexual violence against women and girls, when the Prime Minister knowingly let his friend, Peter Mandelson, a friend of one of the world’s most notorious paedophiles, into the heart of Government and her Department. Is she not ashamed and concerned that our country’s credibility and record on this issue has been damaged because of the Government’s poor judgment, and the Prime Minister’s judgment in appointing Mandelson, knowing his links to Epstein? With Mandelson putting his interests first, has she assessed the damage that his actions have caused to the UK’s international and reputational interests, including our essential work to address the situation in Sudan? To her knowledge, did he at any stage mislead our US ally on national security and foreign affairs on key decisions such as Chagos, which impact our security partnership? This morning I am sure the Foreign Secretary will have seen reports that Secretary Rubio warned the Labour Government over the appointment of Lord Mandelson. Can she confirm whether she or her predecessor were aware of that? The UK’s credibility has been damaged by the Prime Minister and her Government’s appalling judgment. That is why answers are needed.

    This week, the UK assumed the presidency of the UN Security Council. Will the Foreign Secretary tell the House how we will use that position rightly to advance efforts to negotiate to end this conflict? US-led peace efforts are reportedly building momentum, with a text being prepared of a plan to try to stop the fighting. Has she seen and inputted into that text, and what are her views on it? Has she set parameters to decide whether the proposals are the right ones, and has she spoken to other Sudan Quad countries about it? If acceptable, what pressures will be put on the warring parties to agree it? What is her assessment of any progress made since the statement at last April’s Sudan conference in London, and who will participate in the conference in Germany?

    We welcome the new sanctions of the RSF and the SAF, but can we expect further action against the leaders of those barbaric groups, their key operators and enforcers, who were all responsible for administering vile brutality on innocent people in different parts of the country? We all back the sanctions announced in December, but we need stronger action with robust consequences that deter the entities, individuals and businesses whose support continues to sustain this awful war.

    Will the Foreign Secretary update the House on how the UK is using international courts to pursue those responsible for these atrocities being committed, and to gather evidence? We note the £20 million of humanitarian funding announced by the Government for women and girls, so will she confirm whether that is drawn from money already pledged, or whether it is additional new funding? Which organisations are providing the programmes funded by that money, and what are the mechanisms for how the support service will work?

    As well as supporting women and girls affected by sexual violence and the stigma attached to children born from rape, is the Foreign Secretary working to help male victims, where there is also stigma that prevents them coming forward? More broadly, can she update us on the volume of British aid that has managed to get over the border since the escalation of this awful conflict towards the end of last year? What information has she received about what aid is getting through, and whether it is getting into the right hands?

    The war in Sudan is a stain on the world’s conscience, and Britain must exert every ounce of its influence and leverage to get the warring parties to lay down their weapons immediately and to secure a lasting peace.

    Yvette Cooper

    I welcome the shadow Foreign Secretary’s words on Sudan. It is the worst humanitarian crisis in the 21st century, and the whole House should be united in wanting it to end. She asked about the work being done through the Quad, and the work led by the US. I am in close contact with the US special envoy, Massad Boulos, and I am keeping in close contact with Secretary Rubio on this issue. I have also been involved in discussions with the UAE, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. A lot of work is being pursued by the Quad, but, linked to that, the UK and Norway are also pursuing further work, particularly to build civilian capacity. We all want this to move towards a civilian political transition, but we need to build up the capacity of Sudanese civilians, who have faced the most horrendous devastation and had to flee their homes as a result of this conflict, and they need support as well.

    As I said in my statement, we believe that this has to be an international effort, in the same way as in the run-up to the Gaza ceasefire, where there was work by the Arab League to say that Hamas should play no role, work by the UK, France and other countries to recognise the state of Palestine, and work by different countries to put forward potential reform plans during the summer, all of which was ultimately drawn upon in the 20-point plan put together by President Trump last year. We need the same intensity in relation to Sudan, with the same level of international engagement. That is what I want to see, and it is why I spoke to so many African Foreign Ministers in neighbouring countries this week. It is why I have been speaking to the African Union, and why I will be raising the issue not just at the UN Security Council when we hold the Chair this month, but at the Munich security conference, and as part of the Berlin conference. It is crucial that we keep that focus and energy in relation to Sudan. The £20 million announced this week is new money that will be used, in particular, for the survivors of sexual violence.

    The right hon. Lady mentioned Peter Mandelson. As the House will know, I withdrew Peter Mandelson from his role as ambassador to the United States less than a week after I was appointed as Foreign Secretary. I am clear that his actions are completely unforgiveable. Given that at the heart of what Epstein did was the grave abuse and trafficking of women and girls, this is particularly disturbing. I will say something else: I was Chief Secretary to the Treasury at the height of the financial crisis, when everybody was busting a gut to rescue the savings and livelihoods of ordinary people across this country, so the idea that a senior and experienced Cabinet Minister, working alongside us, could instead be behaving the way we have seen is truly shocking. It is right that a police investigation is under way.

  • Yvette Cooper – 2026 Statement on Sudan

    Yvette Cooper – 2026 Statement on Sudan

    The statement made by Yvette Cooper, the Foreign Secretary, in the House of Commons on 5 February 2026.

    I wish to update the House on the situation in

    Sudan.

    On Tuesday night, I returned from the border between Sudan and Chad, where I witnessed from the camp of 140,000 people in Adré—85% of them women and children who have fled the most horrendous violence and violations—the devastating human toll of the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. In January, Sudan passed 1,000 days of conflict between the Sudanese armed forces and the Rapid Support Forces. This is a regionalised conflict of power, proxies and profit, defined by unimaginable atrocities, by millions pushed into famine, by the horrific use of rape as a weapon of war, and by suffering that should strike at the core of our shared humanity.

    That should mobilise the world’s resources and resolve, yet too often the response is to hold back and look away—catastrophically failing the people of Sudan, and Sudan’s women and girls. I am determined that we do not look away, and that we put the spotlight firmly on Sudan. That is why this week I travelled to the region to see at first hand the extent of the crisis, to listen to the testimony of traumatised women and children whose lives will never be the same again, to see how UK support is making a difference, and to see what urgently needs to be done by the international community to help arrest the spiral of bloodshed and drive urgent momentum towards peace.

    In Adré, I met families who had been torn apart, mothers who had survived appalling violence only to find their daughters missing, and frightened children who had travelled vast distances in search of some semblance of safety. I met teachers, nurses, students, market traders, small businesswomen and political activists—impressive women whose lives and livelihoods back home had been stolen from them.

    I met a mother separated from her children who told me she still does not know where they are and whether they are alive; a young woman who told me that most of the women she knew had been through “bad violence” on their journey, but they would not talk about it “because of the shame”; and a Sudanese community worker who told me she thought more than half the women in the camp had directly experienced sexual assault or abuse. I have heard from others in recent weeks, including a Sudanese emergency response room worker who described three sisters arriving at the response room who had all been raped. The oldest was 13, and the youngest was eight. This is a war waged on the bodies of women and girls.

    But here is what I also saw: an incredible group of Sudanese women who have set up a makeshift support centre for women who have suffered sexual violence and for children with trauma. They have activities for children and support for mums. More survivors need that kind of help, so this week I announced that the UK will fund a new £20 million programme to support survivors of rape and sexual violence in Sudan, enabling them to access medical and psychological care, given the terrible stigma endured by survivors and children born of rape. That is part of our international action to tackle a global emergency of violence against women and girls.

    What I did not see in Adré is just as disturbing: the fathers, husbands and brothers missing, either killed, drawn into the fighting or migrating further and leaving family behind. Reports from El Fasher after the RSF attacks were of atrocities so appalling that they could be seen from space—blood-soaked sand, multiple piles of bodies and mass graves—but aid agencies are still facing barriers to getting in. There are reports that the Sudanese Armed Forces are refusing to let desperately needed humanitarian aid through, even though right now some 30 million people need lifesaving assistance due to this war, and up to 7 million face famine. That is nearly equivalent to the entire population of London—every person across the entire city we stand in today.

    In December, the UK provided an additional £21 million for food, shelter and health services, and we have committed £146 million to support over 800,000 people this year alone. Since the conflict began, we have reached over 2.5 million people, delivering water and medicine to hard-to-reach areas. We will continue to make Sudan a top priority for UK humanitarian support, and we will support reforms such as the steps advocated by UN humanitarian chief Tom Fletcher and the International Rescue Committee to strengthen prioritisation and closer work through local partners on the ground. But for aid to save more lives, the deliberate barriers to humanitarian access must be lifted.

    Aid alone will not solve this crisis; we need an immediate and urgent ceasefire, we need those responsible for these atrocities to be held to account, and we need a pathway to peace. There is no military solution to the conflict—that only results in devastation for Sudan—yet the military men driving this conflict still refuse to agree a truce, and there is disturbing evidence that they are seeking and getting hold of ever more dangerous weapons.

    This crisis is compounded by regional rivalries and vested interests, with the real risk of further escalation within Sudan and beyond as fighting spreads to the Kordofan regions. I am very fearful that the RSF advances on the city of El Obeid risk turning it into another El Fasher. Co-ordinated and determined international pressure are needed to halt this bloodshed and pursue an immediate truce, with a halt to the arms flows, tangible pressure from all those who have backed the RSF and SAF or who have influence upon them to deliver a ceasefire, and pressure from the entire international community too.

    The US has been working intensively to secure a truce, drawing together other Quad countries—the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Egypt—and discussing humanitarian support, military withdrawal, civilian transition and action to stop arms flows. I am in close contact with all members of the Quad, including Secretary Rubio and the President’s senior adviser on Africa, as we urgently push for a way forward. The UK is particularly involved in a process to support Sudanese civilians to build their capacity.

    African partners in the region also have a critical role. In Addis Ababa earlier this week, I met Foreign Ministers from Ethiopia, Kenya, South Sudan, Chad, and the African Union’s chairperson and peace and security commissioner, to discuss what more can be done by border countries, and their assessment of the action needed to achieve a ceasefire. We need to build the same focus and momentum behind a peace process for Sudan as we had last year around Gaza, with countries from across the world coming together to back a ceasefire. That is why I am so determined that the UK will keep the international spotlight on Sudan. This month the UK holds the presidency of the United Nations Security Council, and we will use it to press for safe, unimpeded humanitarian access, accountability for atrocities, and international co-operation for a ceasefire. We will use it to ensure that the voices of Sudan’s women are heard in the Security Council Chamber.

    As we look to the third anniversary of this devastating conflict in April, the UK and Germany will jointly convene a major international conference on Sudan in Berlin. In November, UK leadership at the UN Human Rights Council secured international agreement for an urgent UN inquiry into crimes in El Fasher, following its capture by the RSF. Later this month we will receive the report of that UN fact-finding mission, because as well as pursuing peace, we must also hold the perpetrators to account.

    Today I can announce new action that the UK is taking to apply pressure deliberately on the belligerents, with fresh sanctions targeting senior figures in the SAF and RSF who have committed atrocities across Sudan. We are also targeting a network of individuals operating behind the scenes to procure weapons and recruit mercenary fighters. These designations send a clear message that the UK will hold accountable those suspected of perpetrating and profiteering from the most egregious violations of international humanitarian law.

    To look away from crises such as Sudan is not just against our values but against our interests. Wars that rage unresolved do not just cause harm to civilians, because their destabilising effects ripple across borders and continents through migration and extremism. Let 2026 be the year that the world listens to the women of Sudan, not the military men who are perpetuating this conflict. Let 2026 be the year that the world comes together to drive urgent new momentum for peace. I commend this statement to the House.

  • Ed Davey – 2026 Speech on the Prime Minister’s Visit to China and Japan

    Ed Davey – 2026 Speech on the Prime Minister’s Visit to China and Japan

    The speech made by Ed Davey, the Leader of the Liberal Democrats, in the House of Commons on 2 February 2026.

    With your indulgence, Mr Speaker, I start by paying tribute to my friend Jim Wallace, one of the great Scottish Liberals. I offer our thoughts and prayers to his family and many friends. Jim devoted his life to public service, his Christian faith and the cause of liberalism. But his judgment was not always impeccable, for it was Jim who gave me my first job in politics. We will miss him.

    I thank the Prime Minister for advance sight of the statement. I listened to the Conservative leader, whose position now seems to be to oppose trade with the world’s biggest economies—so much for global Britain. With President Trump threatening tariffs again, just because of the Prime Minister’s trip, and with Vladimir Putin still murdering civilians in Ukraine, now more than ever the United Kingdom must forge much closer alliances with nations that share our values, our belief in free trade and our commitment to mutual defence. China shares none of those.

    The Prime Minister’s main focus should be on the closest possible ties with our European neighbours, our Commonwealth allies and our friends such as Japan and Korea. Once again, he has made the wrong choice. However, unlike the Conservative party, we think he was right to go and engage. But just like with President Trump, he approached President Xi from a position of weakness instead of a position of strength, promising him a super-embassy here in London in return for relatively meagre offers from China.

    The Prime Minister rightly raised the case of Jimmy Lai, whose children fear for his health after five years held in captivity, so will he tell us what Xi said to give him confidence that Mr Lai is now more likely to be released? Did he also challenge Xi on the bounties on the heads of innocent Hongkongers here in the United Kingdom, or the revelation that China hacked the phones of No. 10 officials for years? In other words, did he stand up for Britain this time?

    Yet again, the Prime Minister had to spend time on a foreign trip responding to revelations about the vile paedophile and sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein’s relationship with Lord Mandelson. The Prime Minister has rightly said that Mandelson should resign from the other place, but since he has not, will he back a simple piece of legislation to strip him of his peerage? Surely this House could pass it tomorrow.

  • Kemi Badenoch – 2026 Speech on the Prime Minister’s Visit to China and Japan

    Kemi Badenoch – 2026 Speech on the Prime Minister’s Visit to China and Japan

    The speech made by Kemi Badenoch, the Leader of the Opposition, in the House of Commons on 2 February 2026.

    I thank the Prime Minister for advance sight of his statement, but it is utterly reprehensible that he began it by accusing the previous Government of isolationism—the same Conservative Government who—[Interruption.] The Business and Trade Secretary is laughing, but let me tell him this. That same Conservative Government led the world in our response to the invasion of Ukraine and signed the vital strategic alliance of AUKUS—[Interruption.] The Business Secretary asks how many free trade agreements we did. We signed Britain’s biggest post-Brexit trade deal—the CPTPP—bringing us closer to the 11 Indo-Pacific nations, including Japan. I know about that deal because I signed it myself.

    I welcome the Prime Minister’s efforts to collaborate more with our long-standing ally Japan, but let me turn to China. Of course Britain should engage with China. Even though the Chancellor was not allowed to go, even though it is an authoritarian state that seeks to undermine our interest, even though it spies on us—sometimes within the walls of this building—and even though it funds regimes around the world that are hostile to our country, China is a fact of life, a global power and an economic reality. Let me be clear: it is not the Prime Minister engaging with China that we take issue with. What we are criticising is his supine and short-termist approach.

    I am sure that the Prime Minister means well, but his negotiating tactic has always been to give everything away in the hope that people will be nice to him in return. Before the Prime Minister had even got on the plane, he had already shown that he would do anything to demonstrate his good relationship with China. China, however, uses every interaction to improve its own position. The Prime Minister looked like he enjoyed his trip—in fact, it looked like a dream come true for a man who was virtually a communist most of his life.

    Apart from the Labubu doll in his suitcase—which I hope he has checked for bugs—the Prime Minister has come back with next to nothing. We all want cheaper tariffs for Scotch whisky, but if the Prime Minister had bothered to speak to the whisky industry, as I did two weeks ago, he would know that what it really needs is cheaper energy and lower taxes. The Prime Minister also got us visa-free travel, but China already offers that to other countries. It is not big enough for a prime ministerial visit.

    The worst thing was the Prime Minister claiming a glorious triumph with the lifting of sanctions on four Conservative MPs, as if he had done us a favour. Let me tell him this: those MPs were sanctioned because they stood up to China. They stood up against human rights abuses, and they stood up against a country that is spying on our MPs in a way that the Prime Minister would not dare to do. Those Members do not want to go to China. The Chinese know that. They know that they are giving him something that costs absolutely nothing. Why can the British Prime Minister not see that?

    I say to you, Mr Speaker, and to the whole House that, like with the Chagos islands, the Prime Minister has been played. China is about to build an enormous spy hub in the centre of London—a ransom he had to pay before he could even get on the plane. I would never allow Britain to be held over a barrel like that. Yet again, the Prime Minister has negotiated our country into a weaker position in the world. His entire economic policy is to tax businesses more, regulate them harder and make energy so expensive that we deindustrialise, and then we can import Chinese wind turbines, solar panels and batteries for electric vehicles—all manufactured in a country that builds a coal-fired power station every other week. Did he speak to the Chinese about that?

    What did the Prime Minister’s trip achieve for Jimmy Lai? Nothing. Did China promise to stop fuelling Putin’s war machine in Ukraine? It does not sound like it. What did this trip achieve for the Uyghurs who are being enslaved? Absolutely nothing. Has China agreed to stop its relentless cyber-attacks? We all know the answer to that. The reality is that China showed its strength, and Britain was pushed around, literally. It is no wonder that President Xi praised the Labour party; the Conservatives stood up for Britain—we do not get pushed around.

    Britain is a great trading nation. Of course we should engage with other countries, even hostile ones—[Interruption.]

    Mr Speaker

    Order. Mr Kyle, you said to me when you were going to China how well you would behave and how you owe me a big thank you. You are not showing it today!

    Mrs Badenoch

    Mr Speaker, I am not worried about the Business Secretary; the entire business community thinks he is a joke and does not know what he is talking about.

    As I was saying, of course we should engage with other countries, even hostile ones, but we need to do so with our eyes open and from a position of strength. That requires a Prime Minister and a Government who put our national interest first.

  • Keir Starmer – 2026 Statement on Visit to China and Japan

    Keir Starmer – 2026 Statement on Visit to China and Japan

    The statement made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, in the House of Commons on 2 February 2026.

    With permission, I will update the House on my visit last week to China and Japan, where we delivered for the British people.

    With events overseas directly impacting on our security and the cost of living, I made it a founding principle of this Government that, after years of isolationism, Britain would face outwards once again. This was an 18-month strategy to rebuild our standing and we have delivered: strengthening our US relationship with our world-first trade deal; resetting our relationship with the EU; striking a groundbreaking free trade agreement with India; and now, thawing our ties with China to put this relationship on a more stable footing for the long term.

    China is the second biggest economy in the world. Including Hong Kong, it is our third biggest trading partner, supporting 370,000 British jobs. It is also an undeniable presence in global affairs. It would be impossible to safeguard our national interests without engaging with this geopolitical reality. Yet we inherited a policy from the previous Government not of engagement with China, but of hiding away and sticking their heads in the sand. While our allies developed a more sophisticated approach, they let the UK fall behind. We became an outlier. Of my three predecessors, none held a single meeting with President Xi. For eight years, no British Prime Minister visited China—eight years of missed opportunities. Meanwhile over that period, President Macron visited China three times, German leaders four times, the Canadian Prime Minister was there a few weeks ago, and Chancellor Merz and President Trump are both due to visit shortly.

    Tom Tugendhat (Tonbridge) (Con)

    They went on their feet, not on their knees. [Laughter.]

    Mr Speaker

    Order! Mr Tugendhat, you will withdraw that remark.

    Tom Tugendhat

    I am sorry, Mr Speaker. I withdraw it.

    Mr Speaker

    Thank you. Can we calm it down? I am sure you will want to catch my eye and I would like to hear what you have to say, so let us not ruin the opportunity.

    The Prime Minister

    In this context, refusing to engage would be a dereliction of duty, leaving British interests on the sidelines. Incredibly, some in this House still advocate that approach. But leaders do not hide. Instead, we engage and we do so on our own terms, because, like our allies, we understand that engagement makes us stronger.

    Protecting our national security is non-negotiable. We are clear-eyed about the threats coming from China in that regard, and we will never waver in our efforts to keep the British people safe. That is why we have given our security services the updated powers and tools they need to tackle foreign espionage activity wherever they find it, and to tackle malicious cyber-activity as well. The fact is that we can do two things at once: we can protect ourselves, while also finding ways to co-operate. It was in that spirit that we made this visit.

    I had extensive discussions, over many hours, with President Xi, Premier Li and other senior leaders. The discussions were positive and constructive. We covered the full range of issues, from strategic stability to trade and investment, opening a direct channel of communication to deliver in the national interest, enabling us to raise frank concerns about activities that impact our national security at the most senior levels of the Chinese system. We agreed to intensify dialogue on cyber issues and agreed a new partnership on climate and nature, providing much-needed global leadership on this vital issue.

    I raised a number of areas of difference that matter deeply to this country. I raised the case of Jimmy Lai and called for his release, making clear the strength of feeling in this House. Those discussions will continue. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary is in touch with Mr Lai’s family to provide further briefing.

    I raised our human rights concerns in Xinjiang and Tibet. We discussed Taiwan, wider regional stability, Iran and the middle east. I called on China to end economic support for Russia’s war effort, including the companies providing dual-use technologies, and urged it to use its influence on Putin to push for the much-needed ceasefire in Ukraine.

    I also raised the fact that Members of this House have been sanctioned by the Chinese authorities. In response, the Chinese have now made it clear that all such restrictions on parliamentarians no longer apply. I want to be clear: this was not the result of a trade. Yes, Members will want to see more—I understand that—but that is precisely the point: ignoring China for eight years achieved nothing. This step is an early indication, not the sum total, of the kind of progress that this sort of engagement can achieve through leader-to-leader discussion of sensitive issues, in standing up for British interests.

    My visit was also about creating new opportunities for British businesses to deliver jobs and growth for the British people. We took with us a brilliant delegation of nearly 60 businesses and cultural powerhouses—the very best of British—as an embodiment of what this country has to offer. If anyone is in doubt as to why this matters, I urge them to spend a few minutes with any one of those businesses; they will describe the incredible potential there and the importance of getting out there and accessing the market.

    We made significant progress, paving the way to open the Chinese market for British exports, including in our world-leading services sector. We secured 30-day visa-free travel for all Brits, including business travellers. We secured China’s agreement to halve whisky tariffs from 10% to 5%, which is worth £250 million to the UK over the next five years—a significant win for our iconic whisky industry, particularly in Scotland. That lower tariff comes into force today. In total, we secured £2.3 billion in market access wins, including for financial services, £2.2 billion in export deals for British companies and hundreds of millions of pounds-worth of new investments.

    In addition, we agreed to work together in some key areas of law enforcement. Last year, around 60% of all small boat engines used by smuggling gangs came from China, so we struck a border security pact to enable joint law enforcement action to disrupt that supply at source. We also agreed to scale up removals of those with no right to be in the UK and to work together to crack down on the supply of synthetic opioids.

    We will continue to develop our work across all these areas, because this is the start of the process, not the end of it. My visit was not just about coming back with these agreements, but about the wider question of setting this relationship on a better path—one that allows us to deal with issues and seize opportunities in a way that the previous Government failed to do.

    Finally, I will say a word about my meetings in Tokyo. Japan remains one of our closest allies; together, we are the leading economies in the comprehensive and progressive agreement for trans-Pacific partnership, and we are partners in the G7, the G20 and the coalition of the willing. Japan is the UK’s largest inward investor outside the United States and Europe.

    I had an extremely productive meeting with the Prime Minister of Japan, where we set out our shared priorities to build an even deeper partnership in the years to come. Those include working together for peace and security, supporting Ukraine as we work for a just and lasting peace, and deepening our co-operation in cutting-edge defence production, including through the global combat air programme. We discussed how we can boost growth and economic resilience by developing our co-operation: first, in tech and innovation, where we are both leaders; secondly, in energy, where Japan is a major investor in the UK; and, thirdly, in trade, where we are working together to maintain the openness and stability that our businesses depend on. That includes expanding the CPTPP and deepening its co-operation with the EU. We will take all of that forward when I welcome the Prime Minister to Chequers later this year.

    This is Britain back at the top table at last. We are facing outward, replacing incoherence and isolationism with pragmatic engagement, and naive posturing with the national interest. In dangerous times, we are using our full strength and reach on the world stage to deliver growth and security for the British people. I commend this statement to the House.