Category: Foreign Affairs

  • David Lammy – 2025 Speech on Diplomacy in the Digital Age

    David Lammy – 2025 Speech on Diplomacy in the Digital Age

    The speech made by David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, at the British High Commission in Singapore on 12 July 2025.

    It’s great to be here today.

    As you have heard, I recently marked 25 years as a member of Parliament and this week one year as Foreign Secretary. It’s a pleasure to visit your great country following your sixtieth birthday as a nation.

    Whenever I’ve come to Singapore and the wider ASEAN region, I’m struck by the innovative spirit, the creativity and the optimism.

    Sixty years ago, Prime Minister Harold Wilson talked of the “white heat of technology” transforming British society and industry. Today, the whole world is being radically reconfigured by technology, but nowhere faster, or more successfully, than here.

    I’m particularly pleased to be here after my second ASEAN foreign ministers meeting in Malaysia. In Laos last year, I promised to reconnect Britain to the Indo-Pacific and that is well underway.

    In just over a year, I’ve made 5 visits spanning 10 countries to the region. I’ve no doubt this will rise during my time in this job.

    The Indo-Pacific matters to the UK. ASEAN will be the world’s fastest-growing economic bloc over the next decade. Your investments into Britain like Malaysian firm SMD Semiconductor’s new R&D hub in Wales, your market of 700 million consumers are a huge part of our growth ambitions.

    Over the past year, we have been delivering on our promise to bring our economies closer together. Our CPTPP membership now ratified, our free trade agreement with India now signed our Industrial and Trade Strategies now published all speak to a hugely ambitious future for Britain in the Indo-Pacific.

    But we want to go much further.  We’re working with ASEAN on their Power Grid and economic resilience.  We support CPTPP widening, deepening, and starting dialogues with trading blocs like ASEAN and the EU.

    We are exploring other agreements, too, like a deeper FTA with South Korea or accession to the Digital Economic Partnership Agreement which Singapore co-founded. Today’s ‘digital trade’ will tomorrow simply be ‘trade’, and Britain is committed to making it faster, cheaper and easier.

    As you in Singapore know very well this region is the crucible for global security. Partner countries like Britain must stand up for an open, stable and rules-based international system because our region’s security and your region’s security are inextricably linked.

    Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine drove market turbulence in Asia. Any major supply chain disruption in Asia could push prices up in Britain. If we have learnt one lesson over the past decade, it is that economic security does not respect borders.

    That is why Britain’s new National Security Strategy recommitted to the vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific region. Our Carrier Strike Group recently sailed through your waters – a deployment involving 12 other nations.

    We’re deepening our many regional security partnerships including AUKUS and the Five Power Defence Arrangements.

    HMS Prince of Wales, as we’ve heard, is participating in Exercise Bersama Lima in September and the Malaysian chair kindly invited me to the ASEAN Regional Forum just yesterday, where I underlined British support for ASEAN centrality and our growing cooperation against transnational crime and illicit finance.

    In Singapore, you have proven over generations that it is not size which determines success it is strategic clarity. This is true of technology more than any other area. Singapore has shown what’s possible when digital innovation is matched with long-term thinking and national purpose.

    Back in 1981, when most of us were still working out what a computer was, your leaders set up a National Computerisation Committee. In 2014, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong launched the whole-of-government Smart Nation initiative. Then in 2019, Teo Chee Hean unveiled a National AI Strategy.

    Each time, your leaders were ahead of the game. Each time there was a broader lesson. Singapore didn’t get ahead by throwing money at the private sector and hoping for the best.

    Instead, you built serious public capability like SingPass, thanks to deep technical expertise inside government and investments in areas like compute and data infrastructure.

    Starting in this job, I said that Britain needed to do more listening and less lecturing. A huge part of my trip this week has been to listen and, I hope, learn lessons on how we can pursue a similarly long-term strategy embracing technology. That vision must include specific focus on the intersection of AI and diplomacy.

    This is not yet a staple of foreign ministry and foreign ministers’ discussions at least in my experience. But I believe that unless we lift our heads above the rat-race of crises and summits and examine the longer-term trends reshaping our world we will be boiled like the proverbial frog.

    AI is not just the next rung in the technological ladder. It will deliver a paradigm shift in the distribution and exercise of power. It will redefine how nations project influence how threats emerge and how we defend ourselves. It will therefore transform how diplomacy is conducted.

    As Prime Minister Wong said earlier this year: “The once-rising tide of global cooperation that defined the past decades is giving way to one of growing competition and distrust.  As a result, the world is becoming more fragmented and disorderly”.

    There is much evidence of emerging technology catalysing the deterioration of both domestic and international norms. AI is at the spearhead of hybrid threats like disinformation. It is not enough for responsible states to complain about others’ reckless behaviour.

    If we do not invest in gaining technological edge then our influence will inevitably decline. So today I want to outline a more hopeful vision of a sovereign, AI-enabled foreign policy.

    I am proud of the role British diplomacy played at the Bletchley AI Safety Summit, our creation of the AI Security Institute, our plans for a new counter-hybrid taskforce in the FCDO to ready us for this new age.

    I’m pleased also to see our work with Singapore in areas such as Responsible AI in the Military Realm and with ASEAN on AI for development.

    But there has been little discussion between Britain and partners in the Indo-Pacific and beyond on how to use AI and advanced technology to make our diplomacy more effective.

    I am determined to address this gap as Foreign Secretary, bringing AI to the centre of the FCDO’s policy machine. Like most foreign ministries, too many Foreign Office practices have changed little over the past half century. But the old levers of government – briefings, memos, lengthy debates on drafting – are too slow and cumbersome for the pace of modern statecraft.

    In an age of ever-accelerating speed and complexity we need the tools to match. Let me be clear: AI will obviously not solve foreign policy. It will not eliminate risk, nor remove the need for careful human judgement and the ability of people to build trusting relationships, as I have been doing with ASEAN partners this week.

    Diplomacy in 2025 needs machine speed and a human touch. It can help us to make better decisions amidst rising uncertainty. It can improve our ability to detect early signals of crisis, to simulate the likely effects of policy choices and to respond with speed and confidence.

    Imagine for a moment an AI-powered unit at the heart of a foreign ministry. That could catalyse patterns of military movement, energy flows, and online narratives, model how a diplomatic crisis in one part of the world will have ripple effects elsewhere, red-team our response to a crisis – attacking our own policies before others can. Or flag emerging risks that human analysts might miss, especially when they emerge in grey zones favoured by adversaries.

    These capabilities are not science fiction. They are already being employed. The United States’ DARPA and KAIROS projects already simulate complex political developments and anticipate conflict escalation. Estonia’s STRATCOM Centre uses AI-enabled systems to detect disinformation campaigns in real time.

    Of course, Singapore’s Ministry of Trade and Industry uses predictive analytics to flag risks to critical supply chains.

    The question before us is not whether AI will shape foreign policy. It is who will shape it, and how.

    In the British Foreign Office, this government is investing £290 million in reforming our Department, helping to equip our teams with the capabilities and technologies that the modern era demands.

    But outside of the United States and China, no country has the scale to deliver all the capabilities we need independently.

    My call today is therefore for more collaboration, more AI diplomacy within a perimeter of values. I want partners such as Britain and Singapore to align standards, share tools and develop models that reflect our shared principles.

    Deep bilateral partnerships will be at the core of Britain’s approach. For us, our special relationship with the United States will remain foundational rooted in particular on our deep security links.

    With the European Union, we can pursue AI cooperation through the prism of foreign policy and security, not just regulation, and I will be discussing this with Kaja Kallas as part of our recently agreed Security and Defence Partnership.

    With India through the ‘Technology Security Initiative’ we agreed last year, we will focus collaboration more sharply in critical and emerging technologies.

    And with other Indo-Pacific partners I hope that we can build on initiatives like the UK-ASEAN AI Innovation Summit later this year and extend cooperation to AI-enabled foreign policy.

    I said that you in Singapore have shown the power of long-term thinking. The importance of a long-term vision, and I hope we can apply that same approach to breaking down the silos between foreign policy and technology.

    We live in a volatile world. Technology is reshaping our societies, making power more diffuse. Nations like Britain and Singapore need to equip ourselves with the tools to navigate these shifts and that means fusing AI and diplomacy, focusing on a long view of change and doubling down on our shared interests.

    Thank you.

  • Keir Starmer – 2025 Comments on the UK-France Summit Press Conference

    Keir Starmer – 2025 Comments on the UK-France Summit Press Conference

    The comments made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, on 10 July 2025.

    Good afternoon. It’s a real pleasure to be here with President Macron, a firm friend to me personally – and a firm ally to the United Kingdom.

    We first met at the Élysée, I think about two years ago, before I came into office, when I was Leader of the Opposition.

    And it was clear to me then – that we had a shared sense of the dangerous times we’re living through.

    And of our responsibility to step up and to lead. We also share the fundamental belief that we serve our people better – create better jobs and opportunities.

    Make our nations stronger, fairer and more secure if we work together.

    And the State Visit has been a celebration of this relationship –

    Our unique bonds of history and of culture.

    And today, our task is to look forward.

    To deliver a step change in this partnership…

    To meet the challenges of this moment…

    And get the results that people want to see.

    Starting – first – with tackling illegal migration.

    Now, this is a global crisis, and it’s a European crisis….

    But it is also – very acutely…

    A crisis for our two nations –

    A crisis of law, security, humanity – and fairness.

    We face a sprawling, multibillion pound enterprise…

    Run by organised criminal gangs…

    Leading hundreds of people to their death in the Channel.

    So we are determined, together, to end this vile trade.

    There is no silver bullet here.

    But with a united effort…

    New tactics –

    And a new level of intent –

    We can finally turn the tables.

    So I’m pleased to announce our agreement today…

    On a groundbreaking returns pilot.

    For the very first time, migrants arriving via small boat…

    Will be detained…

    And returned to France –

    In short order.

    In exchange for every return,

    A different individual will be allowed to come here…

    Via a safe route, controlled and legal…

    Subject to strict security checks…

    And only open to those…

    Who have not tried to enter the UK illegally.

    This will show others trying to make the same journey…

    That it will be in vain.

    And the jobs they’ve been promised in the UK

    Will no longer exist –

    Because of the nationwide crackdown we’re delivering on illegal working –

    Which is on a completely unprecedented scale.

    The President and I have agreed that this pilot will be implemented in coming weeks.

    Now, I know some people will still ask –

    Why should we take anyone in?

    So let me address that directly.

    We accept genuine asylum seekers –

    Because it is right that we offer a haven to those in most dire need.

    But there is also something else here…

    Something more practical.

    Which is that we simply cannot solve a challenge like stopping the boats…

    By acting alone and telling our allies that we won’t play ball.

    That is why today’s agreement is so important…

    Because we will solve this…

    Like so many of our problems…

    By working together.

    Just look at the steps the French Government is planning…

    Subject to their ongoing Maritime review…

    To allow their officers to intervene in shallow waters…

    And prevent more boats from launching.

    This is a big step.

    I want to thank the President for driving it through.

    So this is our plan, together:

    Hard-headed, aggressive action on all fronts…

    To break the gangs’ business model –

    Secure our borders…

    And show that by attempting to reach the UK by small boat…

    Will only end in failure, detention and return.

    Second, we have also made real progress today on boosting jobs and growth…

    Building on our new agreement with the EU.

    We’re ambitious for what we can do together…

    As G7 economies…

    Close trading partners…

    And leaders in areas that will dominate in years to come.

    Together our countries account for over half of European spending on research and technology.

    So we’ve gone further today…

    Collaborating on satellite connectivity…

    Bringing together our leading supercomputers – to seize the opportunities created by AI…

    And bringing down barriers to trade and investment in strategic sectors.

    Just this week we’ve welcomed EDF’s major investment in Sizewell C –

    Which will create thousands of jobs,

    Boost our energy security,

    And protect billpayers for years to come.

    Third, we have strengthened our work…

    To stand together for European security, and in support of Ukraine –

    Because I’m clear –

    The security of the British people starts in Ukraine.

    We have just co-chaired a meeting of the Coalition of the Willing –

    Including representatives from the United States – for the first time.

    We announced plans for a new “Multinational Force Ukraine.”

    Headquartered in Paris –

    So that we’re ready to support a peace deal when it comes.

    But while Putin turns his back on peace…

    We are rallying more support for Ukraine right now…

    To defend their people – and force Putin to the table.

    Now, as Europe’s only nuclear powers…

    And as leaders in NATO…

    We play a vital role in preserving the peace and security on this continent.

    So today we have updated the historic Lancaster House treaty –

    To protect our people, and our way of life.

    This is a major modernisation.

    We are overhauling the Combined Joint Expeditionary Force –

    To make it five times larger…

    50,000 troops strong…

    Able to act across every domain.

    But we’re going further.

    This morning, we signed the Northwood Declaration.
    Confirming for the first time…

    That we are coordinating our independent nuclear deterrents.

    From today, our adversaries will know –

    That any extreme threat to this continent…

    Would prompt a response from our two nations.

    There is no greater demonstration of the importance of this relationship.

    And while we stand together for our collective defence…

    We must also deliver a defence dividend for working people.

    So we have agreed a deeper industrial partnership today…

    To bring our defence industries closer than ever before.

    We’re not just talking about stepping up…

    On defence, jobs and growth –

    We’re delivering it.

    Previous governments tried and failed to secure results like this.

    We can achieve them now…

    Because we have taken the time and care…

    To do the real work…

    The quiet, serious diplomacy…

    To build proper relationships…

    Which multiply our strength and the opportunities we enjoy.

    So Emmanuel, thank you so much for being here.

    We represent two fiercely proud and independent nations.

    But by working together…

    We are delivering for our people…

    And we are a force for good in a dangerous world.

    Thank you, Emmanuel, and over to you.

  • Keir Starmer – 2025 Comments at the British Museum

    Keir Starmer – 2025 Comments at the British Museum

    The comments made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, at the British Museum in London on 9 July 2025.

    It’s really fantastic to see you here and to just really take in this incredible place that is the British Museum, a world-class institution, which I’m really proud to say is also right in the heart of my constituencies, so welcome to my manor.

    Mr President, Emmanuel, Mrs Macron, Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, you’re very, very welcome here and it is fantastic to see you. We have thousands of visitors here every day from all over the globe to admire the Museum’s incredible collection of world history all around us here, every single day. So it’s a real pleasure to welcome two special sets of guests this afternoon, our brilliant French guests and friends who are all here, but also young people representing the next generation and that is so important as we contemplate our history because I know just how important access to the arts, to culture and history is for the next generation.

    Its potential to spark the imagination. There’ll be very many people who come here and have their imagination sparked and that has put a light on for them and for so many other people to transform young people’s lives by bringing history and culture and art into it. And opening their eyes to new possibilities and opportunities and encourage them to reach the full extent of their ambitions and their talents. So no matter where you’re from or who you are, it’s here to bring us together to remind us of our shared history but also the common bonds that endure across languages, across borders and cultures – and that’s what today is all about, making sure that everyone can appreciate our incredible history, inviting young people to bridge our past and our future and igniting the passions and the talent of the next generation.

    And we are celebrating a brilliant initiative today. Everybody is walking around here with a smile on their face and when the President yesterday announced to both Houses what was going to be happening here there was a great cheer went up and that was representative I think of how this is being felt across the entire country.

    It is a brilliant initiative because what Emmanuel, my friend, announced yesterday, this cultural exchange between our two nations, two of the great treasures of our history, the priceless artefacts of Sutton Hoo, which we’ve just been to see upstairs, absolutely incredible story, incredible artefacts. And the Bayeux Tapestry, which means so much and again the smiles as people saw just the depiction on the wall behind me as we walked in tells you just how much this means. Because for Sutton Hoo 1,300 years ago in East Anglia, a wealthy man, we don’t know who it was, probably a King, was buried in a lavish funeral ceremony, an Anglo-Saxon era that of course was put to an end 300 years later by William the Conqueror at the Battle of Hastings, but it is an incredible piece of history that we have here just imagining what that must have been like changing our perception of that era of history frankly and bringing so much learning to us, and of course the Battle of Hastings illustrated by the remarkable Bayeux Tapestry – the beginning of a thousand years of shared culture that is now defined by mutual admiration and kinship, as well of course by some healthy competition as anyone who was watching the Euros on Saturday will attest, but that history, that long history forms the foundation of the European continent as we know it today. Now both these treasures contain stories of war and of peace, of power and of politics, alliances and enemies that we still know all too well in our modern world. They show us how connected our countries have always been, they deepen our appreciation of our shared history and enrich the relationship between our two nations today because we are now entering a new era of world history, a time of huge change and turmoil that has led to insecurity for so many people and in this new world our alliances are in my view more important than ever.

    The strength and solidarity of countries that share the same values, the same aims, the same hope for the future so just as we stood together in the last century to bring peace to Europe and it was a real privilege, Emmanuel, to mark Armistice Day in France, walking with you the same route as Churchill and de Gaulle once walked. Thank you so much again for that invitation to be there at that very special moment and today the UK is proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with France leading the coalition of the willing to support Ukraine, as well of course us working together to call for a sustainable peace in the Middle East. And at home we’re working together for our shared security and prosperity, creating jobs and growth for our people, tackling irregular migration, strengthening our defences to protect Europe from any threats, growing our economies and collaborating on the technologies of the future, and forging closer connections between our peoples with this cultural exchange, giving people across Britain the chance to admire a Bayeux Tapestry, and there will be so many people who will want to come here to see that as soon as they can, and people across France to enjoy the treasures of ancient England. Well timed for the thousandth anniversary of William the Conqueror’s birth in 2027, so as we look back together today we are also inspired to look forward towards the future and remember that it is for us to write our own chapter of history now as two nations who forged peace, made our people better off and remain the strongest of allies and the closest of friends and on that note it is a pleasure to welcome my friend, Mr President, Emmanuel, to speak to you today.

    Thank you so much.

  • Keir Starmer –  2025 Remarks at Press Conference on Diego Garcia

    Keir Starmer – 2025 Remarks at Press Conference on Diego Garcia

    The remarks made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, at the Permanent Joint HQ in Northwood on 22 May 2025.

    A few moments ago…

    I signed a deal…

    To secure the joint UK-US base on Diego Garcia.

    This is absolutely vital…

    For our defence and intelligence…

    And therefore –

    For the safety and security of the British people.

    The full assessment of why this is so important is highly classified.

    But I want to speak as frankly as I can.

    The strategic location of this base is of the utmost significance to Britain.

    From deploying aircraft to defeat terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan…

    To anticipating threats in the Red Sea and the Indo-Pacific…

    The base is right at the foundation of our security and safety at home.

    It has helped us to…

    Disrupt threats to the UK…

    Support counter terror operations against Islamic State…

    And to reduce the risk to brave British and American servicemen and servicewomen.

    The base will help protect the safe passage of our Carrier Strike Group as it goes through the Middle East.

    It enables rapid deployment across the Middle East, East Africa, and South Asia…

    It helps combat some of the most challenging threats we face,

    Including from terrorism and hostile states…

    And its location creates real military advantage across the Indo-Pacific.

    The base gives the UK and the US access to unique and vital capabilities – which benefit us directly.

    Many of these capabilities are secret, but they include…

    Airfield and deep-water port facilities…

    Facilities that support the worldwide operation of GPS…

    And the monitoring of objects in the earth’s orbit…

    And equipment to monitor the nuclear test ban treaty.

    The base is one of the most significant contributions we make to our security relationship with the United States –

    Which is critical for keeping Britain safe.

    Almost everything we do from the base is in partnership with the US.

    President Trump has welcomed the deal –

    Along with other allies.

    Because they see the strategic importance of this base –

    And that we cannot cede this ground to others who would seek to do us harm.

    And let me be clear –

    We had to act now…

    Because the base was under threat.

    The courts have already made decisions which undermine our position.

    And if Mauritius takes us to court again…

    The UK’s longstanding legal view…

    Is that we would not have a realistic prospect of success…

    And would likely face a Provisional Measures Order within a matter of weeks.

    But this is not just about international law.

    This is about the operation of the base.

    Even if we chose to ignore judgments made against us…

    International organisations and other countries would act on them.

    And that would undermine the operation of the base –

    Causing us to lose this unique capability.

    One example of this is the electromagnetic spectrum.

    Countries have the right to manage this spectrum as they wish within their borders…

    A right that’s recognised in regulations…

    And overseen in the International Telecommunication Union.

    The use of spectrum is key to understand and anticipate those who seek to do us harm.

    If our right to control it is put into doubt…

    We would lose the first line of defence against other countries who wish to interfere and disrupt this capability…

    Rendering it practically useless.

    In addition – if we do not agree this deal…

    The legal situation would mean that…

    We would not be able to prevent China…

    Or any other nation…

    Setting up their own bases on the outer islands,

    Or carrying out joint exercises near our base.

    We would have to explain to you – the British people –

    And to our allies…

    That we had lost control of this vital asset.

    No responsible government could let that happen.

    So there is no alternative –

    But to act –

    In Britain’s national interest.

    By agreeing to this deal now – on our terms –

    We are securing strong protections, including from malign influence…

    That will allow the base to operate well into the next century…

    Helping to keep us safe for generations to come.

    Other approaches to secure the base have been tried over the years –

    And they have failed.

    Now there is obviously a cost to maintaining such a valuable asset.

    We pay for our other military bases.

    Allies like the US and France do the same.

    This cost is part and parcel of using Britain’s global reach to keep us safe at home…

    And it will be less than cost of running one aircraft carrier for a year.

    Today’s agreement is the only way to maintain the base in the long term.

    There is no alternative.

    We will never gamble with national security.

    So we have acted –

    To secure our national interest…

    To strengthen our national security –

    And to protect the British people for many years to come.

    Thank you.

  • Liam Byrne – 2025 Speech on the UK-EU Summit

    Liam Byrne – 2025 Speech on the UK-EU Summit

    The speech made by Liam Byrne, the Labour MP for Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North, in the House of Commons on 22 May 2025.

    I rise to speak to the House today on behalf of the Business and Trade Committee on our sixth report—a road map for the EU reset. I hope you will forgive me, Madam Deputy Speaker, for using this moment to share my profound thanks to the members of the Committee, who are both diligent and hard-working.

    From our earliest days together as a Committee, it was clear to us all that our relationship with the European Union had been trapped in the logic of the past, and that although not all of that past was bitter, the present was clearly unsatisfactory, and the future could be richer if we collectively chose to reset that relationship with more ambition. That, we sensed, was also the analysis of His Majesty’s Government. We asked ourselves what could be done to move this relationship forward—not distracted by fantasy, but informed with a real, hard-headed and pragmatic focus.

    We travelled to Brussels, Belfast and Geneva. We listened to businesses, trade unions, diplomats and officials in the European Commission. We looked at border posts, trade barriers and, I am afraid to say, an awful lot of lost opportunities. We asked one simple question: how can we make these arrangements better? We sought not to reopen old wounds, but to open new doors.

    What surprised us was that it was not difficult to find 21 different ways in which our relationship with the European Union could be reset in a manner that would make our country richer—with steps that would support our security, deepen our energy ties, and cut the red tape that is throttling trade with the EU. These were not abstract aspirations. They were grounded, practical and deliverable, and they were supported by an overwhelming coalition of business groups that we met. In short, the proposals we presented were backed by business, because they were good for business and therefore good for our country.

    We divided the work into three ambitions: first, to defend our prosperity; secondly, to defend and advance energy co-operation; and, thirdly, to cut the red tape strangling trade at the border.

    On security, we proposed a bold new partnership: a joint defence industrial policy, a framework for protecting critical national infrastructure and stronger co-ordination to tackle economic crime. We called for closer co-operation at the World Trade Organisation, including UK participation in the new dispute resolution procedures, because a rules-based order is not just idealism; for us it is insurance. On energy, we saw something extraordinary: an opportunity to unlock the potential of the North sea as the world’s biggest green energy power station. That vision demanded that we come together with the EU to create a single carbon border adjustment mechanism and to connect, again, electricity trading and emissions trading. That could add up to a faster and cheaper path to net zero for both us and our European neighbours.

    On trade, we welcomed the Government’s ambition for a deep sanitary and phytosanitary agreement and, indeed, a fair fisheries deal, but we pressed for some specifics: mutual recognition of alternative economic operator schemes; bilateral waivers for safety and security declarations; co-operation around roll-on, roll-off ferries; rejoining the Pan-Euro-Mediterranean convention; mutual recognition of conformity assessments; and a long-term road map for compatible regulation.

    On services, we urged His Majesty’s Government to strike a new data adequacy agreement, pursue deeper co-operation on financial services, ensure UK access to Horizon Europe framework programme 10, sort out a new road map for mutual recognition of professional qualifications, reduce the barriers for touring artists, and implement a visa-based, number-capped, age-capped youth experience scheme.

    We published our draft report to test it. The response was overwhelming, with support levels of between 80% and 90% for the measures that we proposed. Businesses said, “This is what we need, because it will unlock growth, create jobs and raise wages.”

    On Monday, we saw some signs that the Government had listened. We were glad to see progress on security, defence, electricity trading and emissions alignment. There was a new security and defence pact. There was useful language on critical national infrastructure. There was a welcome step towards joining electricity and carbon markets together. There was, however, also much left in the to-do pile. There was no iron-clad commitment to a shared defence industrial policy and there was too little progress on law enforcement co-operation. There was silence on WTO co-operation, although I acknowledge that may come in the trade strategy when it is published. We also thought that there could have been more on financial services co-operation, data adequacy and mutual recognition of conformity assessments.

    This is a deal without a date—a handshake, but not yet a contract. None the less, it was an important start. After years of drift and division, this was the first time since Brexit that, collectively, we had the chance to stop digging ditches of grievance and start rebuilding some bridges of co-operation. This was a step forward, but it was only a step. What comes next must be really clear. We must now have a timetable for drawing up, finalising and implementing these agreements. There should be action to take forward the unfinished business, which we have set out in this report. Crucially, we think there should be a bigger role for Parliament, because Parliament should not be a bystander while our future is forged.

    Let us not retreat into nostalgia. Let us work pragmatically together in the national interest, because that is how futures are built. We are at our best in this Parliament when we choose to lead, and that is exactly what this relationship now needs. I commend to the House this report and its call to action.

    Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)

    Does my right hon. Friend agree that consistency and clarity are exactly what businesses require to grow and thrive? That is why the Government should consider the report’s recommendation to consult with industry on rejoining the pan-Euro-Mediterranean convention. PEM membership could support tariff-free trade, simplify rules of origin and reduce trade barriers for key sectors such as automotive, manufacturing, chemicals and food production. By joining PEM, British business would expand its preferential market access to 25 countries, thereby strengthening supply chains and boosting the competitiveness of British exports.

    Liam Byrne

    My hon. Friend made that point repeatedly during the Committee’s deliberations. What has been especially welcome is how she consistently brings the perspective of local businesses in her Dudley constituency —the home of the industrial revolution, as we all know. She is right that, subject to consultation, in particular around the implications for the electric vehicle industry, rejoining the PEM convention could deliver us some rules of origin that would radically cut red tape for many businesses in her constituency and across our country. Frankly, it would also lower costs at a time when that is much needed.

    Dame Harriett Baldwin (West Worcestershire) (Con)

    I thank the right hon. Gentleman and his Committee for their extensive piece of work and for the report he has presented today. He mentions the wide range of different asks that the UK Government had and that he recommended that they pursue. Does he agree that it is disappointing that out of the areas that the UK wanted to achieve agreement on, movement for touring artists and participation in EU defence spending are left unagreed, while the UK Government seem to have agreed on and traded one of our most valuable areas in the negotiation: access to our fishing grounds?

    Liam Byrne

    The hon. Lady will know, as I do, that although fisheries and the fishing industry constitutes quite a small part of our economy—about 0.04% of GDP—for many coastal communities it is a vital industry. Nevertheless, we felt—I certainly did—that the prize of an SPS agreement, which could be worth a huge boost of up to £3 billion to £4 billion a year according to Aston University and that allows for shellfish exports to the European market, was potentially a prize was worth having.

    However, the hon. Lady is right to say that the biggest concern that we should have had was defence industrial co-operation. We cannot defend Europe in the way that we should, and we cannot spend the increases in our defence spending in the way that we should, unless we reorganise Europe’s fragmented defence industrial base. We cannot be stronger together unless we build that shared defence base together. I very much hope that we will hear of progress on that in the strategic defence review and the national security review when those strategies are presented to Parliament before the summer recess.

    Gregor Poynton (Livingston) (Lab)

    Our Committee’s report covered how we can help agrifood businesses export to the EU, and I was delighted to see Salmon Scotland and the National Farmers Union Scotland come out in support of the deal this week. Does my right hon. Friend agree that it was baffling to see the SNP stand with Reform and the Tories in opposition to the deal?

    Liam Byrne

    The consensus when we published the draft of our report was overwhelming, and the measures we proposed were backed by an enormous majority of business groups across the country, including groups across Scotland. What business saw was a practical, hard-headed, common-sense set of recommendations that should be supported by not only the Government but those in public life across our country.

    Charlie Maynard (Witney) (LD)

    I thank the right hon. Member for his leadership and hard work on the Committee. I welcome the move this week, and the set of aspirational statements of intent that go in the right direction. That is great, but does he agree that we should focus on the big stuff? Proportionately, the deal with India will get us 0.1% of GDP growth by 2040 and the American pact takes us to a position that is worse than where we were six months ago, so Europe is where it is at. Europe represents 45% of our trade versus 12% with the US, but of the beneficial 21 recommendations that the Committee set out, maybe five or six have been hit. The key thing is to go for the big stuff, such as being back inside the customs union. That would make a big difference.

    Liam Byrne

    The report could not have been as well written or as strong and robust in its recommendations without the hon. Member’s input. We are grateful for the hard work he put into getting the report right. As he knows, a bespoke customs union was not a proposal we made, perhaps because it would not necessarily have swept up the Committee in unanimity. What is striking is that the measures set out in the report would have been significant enough to offset the economic damage we will suffer because of the tariffs introduced by President Trump. The hon. Member is right that in economic matters it is always wise to focus on the big numbers, and the big numbers in trade come from a better, closer, stronger relationship with the European Union.

    Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)

    I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his report and his stewardship of the Committee. My inbox was full of emails from local businesses in Redditch, relieved that after years of hesitation and no progress we are finally in a dialogue with the EU about improving access for businesses. Does he agree that, as the report states, by continuously speaking to the EU we can finally start getting rid of the red tape, as was promised to businesses by many on the pro-Brexit side, and get proper access to the markets that world-leading companies in Redditch really should be able to access freely?

    Liam Byrne

    My hon. Friend has consistently been a strong voice for the business community in Redditch since he joined us in the House. He is right that what has been lacking for a long time in the relationship with the European Union is the kinetic energy required to drive any bureaucracy forward.

    A number of working groups were set up because of the trade and co-operation agreement. In a cross-party spirit, I should say it is important to note that the mood in Brussels changed significantly under the last Prime Minister, with the progress made in the Windsor framework. However, unless significant amounts of political attention and energy are invested, things will not move forward, and there is still a long way to go. The Committee has set out in the report where some of that progress still needs to happen, but ultimately politics is what changes things. I hope that the political energy that went into Monday can be sustained for the future.

    John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)

    I thank the right hon. Gentleman, whose tremendously adroit chairmanship of the Committee has allowed a lot of cross-party working, which has been really refreshing and very good. This is a moment of regret: the Committee did flag up how fragile coastal communities could be damaged badly by a multi-year deal on fishing, and the 12-year deal is beyond anything anybody imagined. It will hammer fragile communities right across Britain, and particularly in Scotland; that is unfortunate. Does he agree that achieving an SPS deal must be balanced with the deals with India, America and so forth that are coming down the tracks—I am sure the Committee will look at this—and that we must have due care for ensuring that the Brexit freedoms that allow us to strike those deals are not damaged?

    Liam Byrne

    The hon. Gentleman is right. As we were composing the report for the House over the last few weeks, he consistently underlined the risks that coastal communities would confront if the deal were to go the wrong way. We are all incredibly grateful to him for the voice he provided

    We must ensure that we enshrine certain standards that allow us to draw closer to Europe without compromising the alliances already coming into place and those that we still need to strike in order to restore our role as the great free trading nation on this planet. The way in which the Government seek to tessellate the agreement with the trade deal with the United States, with our leadership of the comprehensive and progressive agreement for trans-Pacific partnership, with the deal with India and with the deals that are still to come with the Gulf Co-operation Council, Korea and Switzerland needs to be very carefully balanced. It looks like the Government have just about got it right. However, I know that the hon. Gentleman, like me, will want our Committee to keep an extremely close eye on that as the trade talks proceed.

    James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)

    I thank my right hon. Friend for this excellent report that is rooted in pragmatism and practical steps, which I know my constituents welcome. He has highlighted a gap—as he sees it, it is a first step —and there is a lot more to do. Will his Committee undertake to monitor the gap between what the Government have committed to and where he would like the Government to be, and will he and his Committee continue to make recommendations to the Government?

    Liam Byrne

    My hon. Friend is right to point that out. The good news for the Minister is that he now has the scrutiny framework in front of him that the Committee will use to judge the progress that he makes over the course of this Parliament. There is a moment that is still to come for this Parliament, however. At some point—we are not quite sure when—scrubbed treaties will need to be laid in this House. This House will then enjoy the grand total of 21 days during the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 process in which to scrutinise them. That is not very long. The Committee has therefore decided this week that we will open inquiries on the EU, India and United States deals. We will seek to hold hearings on each of those trade deals before the summer so that the House can be as well informed as possible when the CRaG process begins, and we can zero in on the issues that are at stake for our constituents.

    Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)

    I am grateful to the Chair of the Business and Trade Committee for this thorough set of proposals, and especially for the call for a greater role for Parliament. The Committee red, amber and green-rated its 20 proposals and marked as green the UK-EU security pact. Yet the Prime Minister’s spokesman admitted:

    “This is a first step towards UK participation in Europe’s defence investment progression”

    and went on to say that it merely

    “opens the door towards joint procurement.”

    Will the Committee Chair acknowledge how much more there is to do before this amounts to a shared defence industrial base?

    Liam Byrne

    The hon. Member is absolutely right. He knows, because of the extraordinary record of service that he brings to this House, that there is an immense amount of work that we still need to do to conquer the inefficiencies and fragmentation of the European defence industrial base. We cannot spend the money that we propose to spend on defence wisely unless we change the way that we procure military equipment. On the one hand, that will provide greater certainty and long-term contracts to defence suppliers and, on the other, it will help ensure that we are building an innovative ecosystem of funding to help smaller, innovative, nimble and agile suppliers of weaponry to come forward in the way that they can to ensure that the lessons that we have learned on the battlefields of Ukraine inform our military strategy in future.

    If there is one lesson that we have learned, it is that any warfighting capability depends on the strength of our defence industrial base. Quite obviously, today’s defence industrial base in Europe is not in the right place, and together with our partners we have to work hard on that. I hope that the strategic defence review will set out some practical steps for how we will do that together with our allies in Europe.

    Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)

    I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on his statement and on the work of his Committee. Clearly, renewable energy is an important part of our relationship with the European Union. What opportunity did his Committee have to examine that and the trade of energy between the UK and the European Union, particularly in the light of the possibility in the near future of an interconnector between Morocco and the UK by way of the UK-Morocco Power Project, or Xlinks? He may know that if the UK does not greenlight that in the near future, other European countries certainly will.

    Liam Byrne

    The right hon. Member is absolutely right to say that Morocco is a country that we should work more closely with. Xlinks is an exciting proposal. As a stable, long-term partner to Europe, Morocco is a country with which we have a shared interest in the future.

    The perspective that we brought to the question was on how we can ensure a faster, cheaper and less risky path to net zero for us and for Europe. We heard striking evidence from many in the electricity and energy sectors about almost the thoughtless way that we had been disconnected from electricity trading schemes. What really worried us in the near term was that, given different carbon prices in the UK and Europe, if Europe introduced a carbon border adjustment mechanism, and we did a little later on, almost a tariff wall would be created.

    We think the Government have done well in seizing that win-win, but that is not to take anything away from the logic and force of the hon. Member’s remarks. Ultimately, we will need several big infrastructure initiatives if we are to do what we all know needs to be done in this country: to drive down industrial electricity prices.

  • Calum Miller – 2025 Speech on Israel

    Calum Miller – 2025 Speech on Israel

    The speech made by Calum Miller, the Liberal Democrat spokesperson on Foreign Affairs, in the House of Commons on 20 May 2025.

    I also thank the Foreign Secretary for advance sight of his statement. I know that he, like me, has been horrified by the scenes coming out of Gaza. Tom Fletcher, the UN’s humanitarian chief, has indeed highlighted and predicted the imminent death of thousands of infants without immediate aid, and said that the amount of aid entering the strip is but “a drop in the ocean”.

    Let us be clear that mass starvation will do nothing to remove Hamas or secure the release of the hostages, so I welcome yesterday’s joint statement with Canada and France. In it, the Prime Minister spoke of taking further action if Israel does not fully lift its aid blockade and draw back from its expansion of military activity. Will the Foreign Secretary confirm whether the expanded sanctions list includes extremist Ministers Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, who have advocated illegal actions to dispossess Palestinians across the occupied territories, and if not, why not? Will the Government go beyond reviewing the 2030 bilateral road map and urgently suspend it unless the Government of Israel change path? Will they now finally block the export of all UK arms to Israel?

    In response to my letter to the Foreign Secretary last week, the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), reaffirmed the Government’s position that they consider that Israel only “risks” breaching international law through its blockade. I ask the Secretary of State what more Israel would have to do to the people of Gaza for its actions to constitute not simply a “risk”, but an actual breach of international law.

    The Minister also stated in his reply that the Government would only proceed with recognition of the state of Palestine at

    “a time that is most conducive to the peace process”.

    Does the Foreign Secretary agree with me and the Liberal Democrats that the time to recognise Palestine is now and that immediate recognition—ideally jointly with France at next month’s summit—would send the strongest possible signal about the UK’s commitment to the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination?

    Mr Lammy

    I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I have condemned the statements of Ben-Gvir and Smotrich in the past. On 6 May, Israel’s Finance Minister Smotrich said:

    “Gaza will be entirely destroyed, civilians will be sent to…the south to a humanitarian zone without Hamas or terrorism, and from there they will start to leave in great numbers to third countries”.

    We condemn that language. We condemn the language of Minister Ben-Gvir and, of course, we keep that language under review and continue to discuss these issues with our international partners.

    The hon. Gentleman asks about recognition and the work that we see France and Saudi Arabia doing. Of course, we are in close dialogue with our P5 partner of France and with Saudi Arabia, in fact. I touched on these issues with the Saudi Arabian PM in Rome at the weekend. The hon. Gentleman asked about the road map. As I have said, we will review the road map. He will recognise that there are elements of that road map, particularly as they pertain to security issues and the work we do jointly on Iran, that would not be right to suspend, but we are reviewing it—as we should, given the circumstances. I have said time and again that we have suspended arms sales that could be used in Gaza, notwithstanding those we must necessarily retain that particularly pertain to the supply chain on F-35s and their use in warfare in other theatres with which we have an interest.

  • Priti Patel – 2025 Speech on Israel

    Priti Patel – 2025 Speech on Israel

    The speech made by Priti Patel, the Conservative MP for Witham, in the House of Commons on 20 May 2025.

    I am grateful to the Foreign Secretary for giving me advance sight of his statement. The humanitarian situation in Gaza is appalling and we continue to see the intolerable suffering of life being lost. A sustainable end to this terrible conflict is urgently and desperately needed, and that means the release of the remaining 58 hostages from the cruel Hamas captivity that we have all witnessed for too long; it means a significant increase in aid getting into Gaza; and it means a new future for Gaza, free from the terror and misery caused by Hamas, who bear responsibility for the suffering we have seen unfolding since 7 October 2023. I will take each of those three issues in turn.

    First, on the hostages, will the Foreign Secretary explain what recent engagements he has had to try to secure their release and return to their loved ones? Is Britain contributing to an overall strategy to free the hostages? Are we in the room for these critical discussions? We know the hard work that went into all this at the beginning of the year.

    Secondly, on aid, I have been asking the Government for weeks for clarity over the way they are using their influence to get aid into Gaza. On 6 and 14 May, we questioned the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), on the steps being taken to unblock aid delivery. We have asked the Government for details of their engagement with Israel, about their response to Israel’s plans for an alternative aid delivery model, and about what practical solutions the UK has worked on with Israel to address concerns about aid diversion, but no substantive answers were given. What have the Government been doing in recent weeks to facilitate the delivery of aid and find practical solutions with other countries to get aid in?

    Have the Government just been criticising Israel, or have they been offering to work constructively to find solutions on aid delivery and securing a ceasefire? We see from the joint statement issued yesterday that the Government and other international partners may not be supporting or participating in the aid delivery model proposed by Israel, so can the Foreign Secretary explain why that conclusion has been reached?

    Melanie Ward (Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy) (Lab)

    Shameful!

    Priti Patel

    If I can return to my remarks, how does that non-participation help to get aid into Gaza and stop the suffering that is being experienced by everyone? [Interruption.] Members shake their heads, but we should all be focused on securing—[Interruption.] Labour Members should be ashamed of themselves, because the focus of this House should be on getting aid into Gaza. The UK—[Interruption.] I can speak as someone who has supported aid getting into Gaza and other humanitarian crises. The hon. Member for Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy (Melanie Ward) might want to intervene rather than calling me out and saying that my comments are shameful. The UK has consistently been a world leader when it comes to aid delivery. We should be at the forefront of finding practical solutions and supporting the delivery of aid to those in need, so has the Foreign Secretary, in the approach that he has just outlined towards Israel, done all he can to secure an increase in aid? Has the UK’s influence fallen in this aid discussion and in the dialogue with Israel?

    Thirdly, on the future of Gaza, the Government have agreed with our position that there can be no future for Hamas—that is completely non-negotiable—so what practical steps are being taken to end their role in Gaza and dismantle the terrorist infrastructure? What co-ordinated international steps are being taken to stem the flow of money, weapons and support bankrolled by Iran? We are still awaiting an Iran strategy from the Government. Can the Foreign Secretary expand upon this?

    We had a statement last month from the Foreign Secretary on the memorandum of understanding with the Palestinian Authority. Can he give an update on what steps are being taken to improve the governance of the PA? The MOU posed many questions, but I do not need to go over them again as I have raised them previously. The UK obviously needs to be involved in this process, given our historical role in, for example, the Abraham accords. This may be our best shot when it comes to regional peace, and the Foreign Secretary must convince us that we have influence when it comes to the ceasefire and negotiating a better future in this part of the world. What discussions have taken place with Administration of the United States—one country that does have influence—on peace efforts and getting aid into Gaza?

    In conclusion, strong words will do little to resolve the real challenges and the suffering that we are seeing day in, day out—[Interruption.] That is a matter for the Government to address. It should be a cause for concern that we have reached a situation where the statements and actions that have been echoed by the Government today—I am referring to the Prime Minister’s joint statement with France and Canada—have now been supported by Hamas, a terrorist organisation that I proscribed as Home Secretary—[Interruption.] They have actually put out a statement, and I am sure the Foreign Secretary has seen it.

    The Foreign Secretary’s decision to tear up trade negotiations with Israel and stop the bilateral road map will not—[Interruption.] It is not shocking. These are important questions. If the Foreign Secretary finds this—[Interruption.] If he cannot answer these questions, that is fine—[Interruption.] Then please do answer the questions, because they are important—[Interruption.] I would if Members did not keep interrupting me. It is quite obvious that the Government do not want to respond to these important questions, but this is important because there is so much human suffering. I understand the Foreign Secretary’s points about the steps he is taking with Israel, but how is this going to help now when it comes to wider security issues and threats from Iran? How do we know that this will not be self-defeating in any way?

    Mr Lammy

    For decades there has been a cross-party commitment to a two-state solution and the pursuit of peace from friends of both Israel and the Palestinian people across this House. It was the Thatcher Government that imposed an arms embargo after Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982. It was David Cameron who first called Gaza a prison camp, and it was Theresa May’s Government that championed UN resolution 2334 on settlements. It was William Hague who worked with John Kerry on the push for peace and condemned the idea of moving the British embassy to Jerusalem. Sadly, today, it seems that the Conservative party, or at least its current Front Bench, is refusing to confront the appalling reality of what is happening in Gaza and what the Netanyahu Government are doing.

    The right hon. Lady seems incapable of offering any serious criticism about the egregious actions of the Netanyahu Government, unlike many hon. Members on her own side. The whole House should be able to utterly condemn the Israeli Government’s denial of food to hungry children. It is wrong. It is appalling. Will she condemn it? Well, the whole House has seen her response. Opposing the expansion of a war that has killed thousands of children is not rewarding Hamas. Opposing the displacement of hundreds of thousands of civilians is not rewarding Hamas. On this side of the House, we are crystal clear that what is happening is morally wrong and unjustifiable, and it needs to stop.

    That is why we have taken the actions we have. The right hon. Lady knows hostage families are deeply concerned about what is happening and about their loved ones—she knows that. She knows we oppose the blockade on aid—does she? It was not clear from her statement whether she does oppose the blockade of aid to children. She should note that our diplomats led that call, with 27 countries joining us, to condemn what is happening and stand on the side of truth and history. What a shame she could not bring herself to do so today.

    Yasmin Qureshi (Bolton South and Walkden) (Lab)

    I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement. Just last week, the UN humanitarian chief Tom Fletcher warned that the Security Council must act “decisively” to prevent genocide. Today, he said that 14,000 babies could be dead in the next 48 hours. The level of destruction we have seen of the Palestinian people and their land is remarkable. Israel has shown that it will not respond to diplomatic appeals. We now need the continuation of a full arms embargo, sanctions, accountability for war crimes, immediate recognition of the state of Palestine, and the return of UNRWA. What additional steps will the Foreign Secretary take to stave off this genocide?

    Mr Lammy

    I draw my hon. Friend’s attention to the announcement I have made today on further sanctions, building on the announcement I made back in October. It is very important that we send a clear message to Israel that it should allow the full resumption of aid into Gaza immediately and should enable the UN and humanitarian organisations to work independently and impartially to save lives, reduce suffering and maintain dignity. She will have noted the co-ordinated statement of 27 countries, including Canada, Denmark, Finland, France and many others, who came together to make their views crystal clear about what we now see happening, what we expect to see happen, and the further action that will have to take place if we do not.

  • David Lammy – 2025 Statement on Israel

    David Lammy – 2025 Statement on Israel

    The statement made by David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, in the House of Commons on 20 May 2025.

    With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement on Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. This weekend, the Israel Defence Forces started a new, extensive ground operation throughout Gaza: Operation Gideon’s Chariots. Five Israeli divisions now operate there. Prime Minister Netanyahu says that they are going to take control of the strip, letting only minimal amounts of food reach Gazans; to quote Mr Netanyahu,

    “just enough to prevent hunger.”

    Fewer than 10 trucks entered Gaza yesterday. The UN and the World Health Organisation have issued stark warnings of the threat of starvation hanging over hundreds of thousands of civilians. This is abominable. Civilians in Gaza facing starvation, homelessness and trauma, desperate for this war to end, now confront renewed bombardment, displacement and suffering. The remaining hostages, kept apart from their loved ones by Hamas for almost 600 days, are now at heightened risk from the war around them.

    Two months ago the ceasefire collapsed. Since then, the humanitarian catastrophe has rapidly intensified. For 11 weeks, Israeli forces have blockaded Gaza, leaving the World Food Programme without any remaining stocks. Israel has repeatedly struck hospitals, and three more in northern Gaza ceased operations this weekend. Yet more aid workers and medical workers have been killed, after last year proved the deadliest year on record for humanitarian personnel.

    The diplomatic deadlock between Israel and Hamas has also hardened. Despite the efforts of the United States, Qatar and Egypt, which we of course support, no ceasefire has emerged. We repeat our demand that Hamas release all the hostages immediately and unconditionally, and reiterate that they cannot continue to run Gaza.

    We are now entering a dark new phase in this conflict. Netanyahu’s Government plan to drive Gazans from their homes into a corner of the strip to the south and permit them a fraction of the aid that they need. Yesterday, Minister Smotrich even spoke of Israeli forces “cleansing” Gaza, of “destroying what’s left” and of resident Palestinians being “relocated to third countries”. We must call this what it is: it is extremism, it is dangerous, it is repellent, it is monstrous and I condemn it in the strongest possible terms.

    Israel suffered a heinous attack on 7 October. The Government have always backed Israel’s right to defend itself. We have condemned Hamas and their abhorrent treatment of the hostages. We have stood with the families and demanded that their loved ones be released. Israel’s plan is morally unjustifiable, wholly disproportionate and utterly counterproductive, and whatever Israeli Ministers claim, it is not the way to bring the hostages safely home. Nearly all the hostages have been freed through negotiations, not military force. That is why hostage families themselves, and many other Israelis, oppose this plan so strongly. It will not eliminate Hamas or make Israel secure either. This war has left a generation orphaned and traumatised, ready for Hamas to recruit. As we learned in Northern Ireland, to defeat terrorists and their warped ideology, we cannot just rely on military might; we have to offer a viable political alternative. Opposing the expansion of a war that has killed thousands of children is not rewarding Hamas.

    Since entering office, we have taken concerted action on Gaza. We have restored funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, supported the independence of international courts, suspended arms export licences, provided food and medical care to hundreds of thousands of Gazans and worked with Arab partners on a plan to ensure a reconstructed Gaza no longer run by Hamas. Since Israel restarted strikes on Gaza, this Government have demanded that Israel change course.

    Privately, in my conversations with Foreign Minister Sa’ar and Strategic Affairs Minister Dermer, and publicly, in repeated joint statements with my French and German counterparts, we have made clear that Israel’s actions are intolerable. We have raised our concerns in the UN Security Council and before the International Court of Justice. Yesterday, my right hon. and learned Friend the Prime Minister joined leaders from France and Canada in strongly opposing the expansion of Israel’s military operations. The UK also led a further statement with 27 partners criticising Israel’s proposed new aid delivery mechanism and defending the essential humanitarian principles of the international system that the UK did so much to establish in the first place.

    Our message is clear. There is a UN plan ready to deliver aid at the scale needed, with mitigations against aid diversion. There are brave humanitarians ready to do their jobs. There are over 9,000 trucks at the border. Prime Minister Netanyahu: end this blockade now and let the aid in.

    Regrettably, despite our efforts, this Israeli Government’s egregious actions and rhetoric have continued. They are isolating Israel from its friends and partners around the world, undermining the interests of the Israeli people and damaging the image of the state of Israel in the eyes of the world. I find this deeply painful, as a lifelong friend of Israel and a believer in the values expressed in its declaration of independence. As the Prime Minister and fellow leaders said yesterday, we cannot stand by in the face of this new deterioration. It is incompatible with the principles that underpin our bilateral relationship, it is rejected by Members across this House, and frankly, it is an affront to the values of the British people. Therefore, today I am announcing that we have suspended negotiations with this Israeli Government on a new free trade agreement and we will be reviewing co-operation with them under the 2030 bilateral road map. The Netanyahu Government’s actions have made this necessary.

    Today, the Minister for the middle east, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer) is summoning the Israeli ambassador to the Foreign Office to convey this message. I say now to the people of Israel that we want—I want—a strong friendship with you based on shared values, with flourishing ties between our people and societies. We are unwavering in our commitment to your security and to your future, to countering the very real threat from Iran, the scourge of terrorism and the evils of antisemitism. However, the conduct of the war in Gaza is damaging our relationship with their Government and, as the Prime Minister has said, if Israel pursues this military offensive as it has threatened, failing to ensure the unhindered provision of aid, we will take further action in response.

    The UK, will not give up on a two-state solution: Israelis living within secure borders, recognised and at peace with their neighbours, free from the threat of terrorism; and Palestinians living in their own state, in dignity and security, free of occupation. The two-state solution remains the ideal framework; indeed, it is the only framework for a just and lasting peace. Yet as the House knows, its very viability is in peril, endangered not only by the war in Gaza but by the spread of illegal Israeli settlements and outposts across the occupied west bank with the explicit support of this Israeli Government.

    There are now weekly meetings to approve new settlement construction. Settlement approval has accelerated while settler violence has soared. Here, too, we have acted: repeatedly pressing for a change in course and direction, sanctioning seven entities in October and signing a landmark agreement to bolster support for the Palestinian Authority when Prime Minister Mustafa visited London last month. But here too, we must do more. Today, we are therefore imposing sanctions on a further three individuals and four entities involved in the settler movement. I have seen for myself the consequences of settler violence, the fear of its victims and the impunity of its perpetrators. Today, we are demonstrating again that we will continue to act against those carrying out heinous abuses of human rights.

    Despite the glimmer of hope from January’s ceasefire, the suffering in this conflict has worsened. January showed that another path was possible, and we urge the Netanyahu Government to choose this path. The world is judging. History will judge them. Blocking aid, expanding the war and dismissing the concerns of their friends and partners is indefensible and it must stop. I commend this statement to the House.

  • David Lammy – 2025 Speech in Lviv on the Special Tribunal

    David Lammy – 2025 Speech in Lviv on the Special Tribunal

    The speech made by David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, in Lviv on 9 May 2025.

    It is a fitting time and place for this discussion.

    It is remarkable that eighty years ago, Allied governments were dealing with detained Nazis, and thinking about accountability for the atrocities.

    Some considered simple revenge.   But others favoured a different approach.

    Holding those criminals accountable under international law.

    Drawing in part on work by two great sons of this great city, Rafael Lemkin Sir Hersch Lauterpacht.

    The resulting Nuremberg trials were a milestone in building a global order rooted in the rule of law and human rights.

    Today, the pursuit of such a global order again seems a tall order.

    Russia is waging a war of aggression, with mounting evidence that Russian soldiers are committing atrocities we would have hoped to consign to history – attacks which rain down on civilians, the deportation of children, torture and sexual abuse of civilians and prisoners of war.

    Russian leaders show not the slightest concern for the lives of individuals or the laws of war.

    But we need to remember figures like Lemkin were not naïve idealists.  Indeed, Sir Hersch wrote about anchoring his philosophy of international law in the ‘realities of international life’.

    Precisely our task today.

    We have it in our hands to hold those responsible for the invasion of Ukraine to account.  The UK is proud to have supported the idea of a Special Tribunal since the outset.

    A Tribunal is an essential part of the armoury of justice, alongside the efforts of Ukrainian authorities to bring prosecutions inside Ukraine, and the work of the ICC.

    As the country where Sir Hersch made his home, we are proud to support the Lviv Joint Statement and endorse the legal foundations for this Tribunal.

    It will take time for a Tribunal to become operational. We support using the framework of the Council of Europe. But also believe we must expand the Core Group to more partners from beyond Europe.

    The whole world is outraged at Russian crimes. The whole world should now come together to hold Russia to account. We must rally all countries in support of justice.

    Our friends in Ukraine are staying true to the legacy of VE Day.

    The legacy of Lemkin and Sir Hersch.

    Thank you.

  • Keir Starmer – 2025 Comments at Press Conference in Kyiv

    Keir Starmer – 2025 Comments at Press Conference in Kyiv

    The comments made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, in Kyiv on 10 May 2025.

    Volodymyr, friends, it is a real pleasure to be here in Kyiv with you all. With Emmanuel, with Friedrich, and with Donald.

    This is Europe, stepping up, showing our solidarity with Ukraine, and also showing during this week when we mark the 80th anniversary of VE Day that we understand the lessons of history.

    The lesson that any veteran of Normandy, of North Africa or any other campaign will tell you but that Putin has not yet grasped:

    There is no glory in aggression and conquest – glory comes from fighting for your country, defending your people, and winning the peace.

    And that is the message of this moment.

    Volodymyr, we stand with you to secure the just and lasting peace that Ukraine deserves.

    It’s almost two months now since you agreed to an immediate 30-day ceasefire. In that time Russia has launched some of the most deadly attacks on civilians of the entire war. Including here in Kyiv.

    Normal lives, homes, families destroyed.

    This is what Russia offers in place of peace along with delays and smokescreens – like the current 72 hour ceasefire.

    And so all of us here – together with the US – are calling Putin out.

    If he’s serious about peace then he has a chance to show it now – by extending the VE Day pause into a full, unconditional 30-day ceasefire with negotiations to follow immediately, once a ceasefire is agreed.

    No more ifs and buts. No more conditions and delays. Putin didn’t need conditions when he wanted a ceasefire to have a parade. And he doesn’t need them now.

    Ukraine has shown their willingness to engage again and again. But again and again Putin has refused.

    So we are clear – all five leaders here, all the leaders of the meeting we just had with the Coalition of the Willing – an unconditional ceasefire rejecting Putin’s conditions. And clear that if he turns his back on peace, we will respond.

    Working with President Trump, with all our partners, we will ramp up sanctions and increase our military aid for Ukraine’s defence to pressure Russia back to the table.

    And that’s what we have been discussing today – as well as securing Ukraine’s future for the longer term.

    Convening the latest meeting of the Coalition of the Willing with partners joining virtually from around Europe and across the world – lining up to support Ukraine’s future strength and security, discussing operational plans and making concrete commitments of support across land, air and sea.

    We want to help Ukraine look to the future with confidence – so we’re working to boost Ukraine’s economy.

    And as a vital step, I’m pleased that UK experts have been on the ground leading work to support the resumption of flights into Ukraine, once a ceasefire is achieved.

    It will take time – but this will be a huge moment in reconnecting Ukraine’s economy, boosting investor confidence, and helping to reunite families separated by this war.

    Ukraine secure and thriving – that is what we all want to see.

    With our 100-year partnership, the Critical Minerals deal with the US, and our Coalition of the Willing, we are building the framework for peace in Ukraine to support a better future for the Ukrainian people.

    And to pledge once again, in our all interests, and on this anniversary, that aggression will never prevail on our continent.

    Thank you.