Tag: 2023

  • PRESS RELEASE : Second UK-Iraq Strategic Dialogue joint communiqué [July 2023]

    PRESS RELEASE : Second UK-Iraq Strategic Dialogue joint communiqué [July 2023]

    The press release issued by the Foreign Office on 4 July 2023.

    The UK and the Republic of Iraq agreed a joint communiqué during the UK-Iraq Strategic Dialogue, held in London on 3 to 4 July 2023.

    The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland, the Rt Hon James Cleverly MP, hosted Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Iraq Mr Fuad Hussein, for the UK-Iraq Strategic Dialogue in London on 3 to 4 July 2023.

    The Strategic Dialogue builds on the signing of the UK-Iraq Strategic Partnership in Baghdad in June 2021 which deepened bilateral co-operation and reaffirmed the UK’s commitment to the long-term security, stability and sovereignty of Iraq. The Strategic Dialogue also follows the visit of the Minister of State for the Middle East and North Africa, Lord Ahmad, to Iraq, including the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, from 28 February to 2 March 2023.

    The Strategic Dialogue underlined the strength and breadth of the bilateral relationship between the UK and Iraq and both governments reaffirmed their commitment to work together for our shared regional and global interests. The ministers agreed to develop and further co-operation on a wide range of sectors, including:

    Economic reform

    The ministers discussed the importance of building a prosperous future for the Iraqi people and the UK’s commitment to support Iraq, including through the Iraq Economic Contact Group, as it undertakes the bold long-term reforms needed to put Iraq’s economy and society on a stable footing.

    Both sides welcomed the Government of Iraq’s ambitious economic reform agenda – and agreed on the necessity of rapidly delivering non-oil growth, private sector job creation and improving access to finance. They agreed on the importance of Iraq swiftly completing its accession to the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development in 2023, and continuing to work closely with the International Monetary Fund on a long term programme to support Iraq, as well as joining other international finance institutions, such as the European Investment Bank.

    The UK committed to share expertise through government-to-government exchanges; and provide bilateral support and technical assistance to deliver economic reform in key areas such as building economic capacity, diversifying government revenue sources and improving access to finance, and facilitating Iraq’s accession to the WTO.

    Trade

    With bilateral trade increasing the 2 sides convened the sixth meeting of the UK-Iraq Trade Council, following the fifth in Baghdad in January 2019. Experts discussed how to encourage greater investment into Iraq and how to remove barriers to trade. The Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs also met leading UK businesses to identify new commercial opportunities.

    Both sides agreed their intention to finalise the UK-Iraq Partnership and Cooperation Agreement as soon as possible and put it to their respective parliaments this year.

    Climate and environment

    Ahead of COP28 later this year, the ministers discussed the importance of working together tackling climate and environmental issues and agreed to increase high level engagement over the rest of 2023. Both sides welcomed the UK’s support in further developing and strengthening Iraq’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). The UK also outlined technical assistance opportunities, including a programme with the UK Met Office to support Iraq’s capacity to prepare for and respond to sand and dust storms.

    Defence and security

    The ministers agreed on the importance of continuing to remove the space for Daesh to operate in Iraq and welcomed the commitment of both the UK and Iraq to support the Global Coalition Against Daesh. They also welcomed the Government of Iraq’s commitment to protect the Coalition sites and diplomatic premises in Iraq.

    The ministers recognised the crucial efforts by both sides on rehabilitation and reintegration of displaced Iraqi citizens including those returning from Al-Hol camp in North-East Syria, and reiterated the importance of international coordination to support pathways to durable solutions for camp residents.

    Both sides recognised the UK’s work with the Iraqi Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Peshmerga Affairs on Professional Military Education and agreed that the Iraqi military will continue to participate in officer training within the UK, including places at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, Britannia Royal Naval College Dartmouth, and Royal Air Force College Cranwell, as well as places at the Defence Academy Shrivenham and the Royal College of Defence Studies.

    Recognising modern threats posed by cyber, both sides agreed to deepen engagement on cyber security, including through the UK’s support of the newly established Cyber Security Directorate within the Iraqi Ministry of Defence.

    Migration and serious organised crime

    Ministers discussed the shared challenges that the UK and Iraq face in tackling serious organised crime and the drivers of migration. The ministers reviewed areas for further cooperation to ensure safe and legal migration, including targeted programming to better understand and address the drivers of illegal migration and establish robust and trusted processes for migration cooperation, including reintegration packages. The UK will bolster its support to strengthen Iraq’s borders through mutually agreed programmes.

    Health

    Both sides reiterated the importance of developing Iraq’s health sector. They welcomed the UK’s ongoing £35 million Demographic Transition programme that aims to support the Government of Iraq to deliver Family Planning and Sexual Reproductive Health services in line with Iraqi rules and law.

    Human rights

    Ministers discussed the need to continue our cooperation on human rights and support for women and girls – particularly survivors of conflict-related sexual violence. The UK welcomed the Government of Iraq’s recent efforts to implement the Yazidi Survivors’ Law and both sides recognised UK support to the launch of the reparations applications process – through which over 800 women and girls have begun receiving reparations – and launch a referral pathway for mental health and psychosocial support services.

    Both sides also discussed the vital need to support children born of conflict-related sexual violence and welcomed Iraq agreeing to consider making voluntary commitments under the Platform for Action on Promoting the Rights and Wellbeing of Children born of conflict-related sexual violence.

    Bilateral and regional politics

    Ministers welcomed efforts by the Government of Iraq to further build relations with the region in the pursuit of stability and cooperation, including through the Baghdad Conference for Cooperation and Partnership. The UK welcomed efforts to connect Iraq to the GCC’s power grid and establish greater energy connections with the region.

    The Republic of Iraq and the United Kingdom look forward to concluding the Strategic Dialogue sessions and reviewing their progress at the next Strategic Dialogue, planned for 2024 in Baghdad.

  • Michael Gove – 2023 Speech to the Local Government Association Annual Conference

    Michael Gove – 2023 Speech to the Local Government Association Annual Conference

    The speech made by Michael Gove, the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, at the Local Government Association Annual Conference held in Bournemouth on 5 July 2023.

    Thank you Kevin for those incredibly kind and inspiring words, and thank you Shaun also for welcoming us to the conference here in Bournemouth.

    And thank you all for being the backbone of our public service.

    Before I go any further, I want to add my own personal tribute to those you have already heard to Bob Kerslake. The LGA family has lost one of its own, and the country has lost a true public servant.

    Bob began his career in government with the Greater London Council, with roles in transport, finance and education. He ended it running the Civil Service.

    Along the way, he was chief executive of the fourth biggest council in England – Sheffield City Council. He also spent 7 years as chief executive at the London Borough of Hounslow, having previously been its director of finance.

    The move into central government saw Lord Kerslake become chief executive of the Homes and Communities Agency; permanent secretary of what was then called the Department for Communities and Local Government, and then of course Head of the Civil Service.

    My colleagues and I most recently valued his work on homelessness at the Kerslake Commission, just as you valued the 6 years he spent as a dedicated LGA President before handing over the baton to Baroness Grey-Thompson.

    On a personal level at the Department for Education I benefitted hugely from Bob’s kindness, his thoughtfulness and his wisdom.

    He was, also, an avowed supporter of devolution – and the flexibility it brought councils during their COVID-19 response. “The vital importance of local government to people’s lives has been very evident throughout this time,” he wrote.

    “If ever there was a practical argument to be made that greater devolution would bring great benefit to the country, it was made over the last year.”

    Bob’s commitment to local government – his belief that power should be exercised as close to the communities we serve as possible – is a continuing inspiration and we honour his memory.

    And in honouring his memory, the first announcement I’d like to make today is quite simple – thank you.

    Putting yourself forward for elected office in local government is an act of selfless public service. Acting as an officer in local government is a noble profession and every one of you deserves our gratitude.

    Especially given the testing times through which we have been living.

    Coping with an unprecedented global pandemic, facing increasing pressures on adult and children’s social care, supporting our Ukrainian guests and others fleeing from Hong Kong and Afghanistan, dealing with inflationary pressures, and always seeking to put the vulnerable in our communities first – we all owe a debt to local government and its leaders.

    And few have been finer leaders than my friend, and your retiring chair, James Jamieson.

    Energetic, always over the detail, persistent, persuasive, a natural team player, a conciliator when required and a fighter for local government always – James: I want to, on behalf of all of us in government and everyone in the hall, say a heartfelt thank you.

    Of course, James, we will stay in touch personally – I hugely value your counsel; I know you will have many future roles to play, not least in the realm of housing policy – and also my diary manager tells me I will be a regular visitor to mid-Bedfordshire in the weeks ahead – a very regular visitor…

    I also want to congratulate your new chair of the LGA. Shaun is the youngest ever chair of the LGA and has racked up a number of achievements at Telford & Wrekin Council since 2016. The LGA noted his ‘outstanding and inspirational’ leadership during COVID-19; while in children’s services, his is the first council outside London to progress from ‘requires improvement’ to ‘outstanding’ status.

    Shaun, I look forward to working with you in the months, and I hope years ahead, to deliver the effective and efficient local services our citizens deserve.

    We will not always agree on the best way forward but I know  that we agree that we can serve the public best when government and local government work closely together. Shaun, congratulations again.

    I personally and this government believe in devolution, decentralisation and driving power down to local communities.

    We want to give local communities more tools – the strongest ones – to make a difference on the issues that matter to residents – from countering anti-social behaviour to revitalising high streets, enhancing the environment to securing more of the right homes in the right places.

    We also believe that with greater power we should also ensure sharper accountability, celebrating the superb work so many councils do and helping to identify where local authorities need additional support.

    We believe that it is by empowering local communities that we can best address the regional economic inequalities which have held us back in the past.

    Local government is at the heart of levelling up. And we also believe in innovation in the delivery of public service – especially when it comes to securing economic growth, delivering beautiful new homes and supporting those most in need.

    I know it is only through listening and learning from you that together we can make progress.

    And the progress that we have made in DLUHC recently has all been down to what we have learnt from you.

    It was your experience in dealing with building safety in the aftermath of the Grenfell tragedy that helped us to bring relief to leaseholders and tenants.

    Your experience in supporting tenants in social housing to secure decent homes which has enabled us to bring in better regulation and higher standards.

    Your knowledge of what works, and what doesn’t, in the private rented sector has shaped our reforms.

    And your experience of the planning system – its strengths and weaknesses – has enabled us to bring forward improvements.

    Your amazing work in supporting Ukrainian refugees has enabled Homes for Ukraine to be such a success – with more than 150,000 Ukrainians benefiting.

    And even now you are helping us to find homes for Afghans to whom we have offered sanctuary, and are working constructively to deal with the pressures, undeniable pressures, that other refugees and asylum-seekers place on communities.

    The wonderful work so many of you do in adult social care is too often underappreciated but I and my ministerial team – and the ministerial team at DHSC – hugely appreciate not just the work you do daily but the expertise that you bring to reforming the sector and helping the most vulnerable.

    On education, supporting children with special needs, and safeguarding children at risk of abuse and neglect – your work, and wisdom, are invaluable.

    In enhancing our environment, dealing with waste, supporting nature to recover and dealing with climate change, you are in the frontline, and we all benefit from your leadership.

    In so many ways local government is the champion of what works, the indispensable ally.

    So much so that when I was told there was a new movie called Everything Everywhere All at Once, I thought it was a fly on the wall documentary about local government.

    Thank you for all you do – and know that it is because you do it so well that we want to empower you further.

    It is our priority, as you know, to go deeper in every area that is keen to pursue further devolution – and I am delighted that devolution deals now cover over 50% of England.

    The LGA has welcomed our commitment to offer all of England the opportunity to benefit from devolution deals by 2030 – and to engage with councils of all sizes.

    Before 2010 the only meaningful devolution within England was to London. Since then, we have allowed more and more communities to take back control of more and more power. Most powerfully through the model of mayoral combined authorities. But also through our programme of county deals and our freeing of districts and boroughs from historic restraints. And the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill gives them – and all planning authorities – more control over the future shape and character of their communities.

    The government’s ambition is to see devolution extended further across England, beyond just the areas named in the Levelling Up White Paper. And we are taking inspiration from the trailblazer MCA model: I can confirm today that these deals will act as the blueprint for other Mayoral Combined Authorities to follow.

    As well as the trailblazer devolution deals signed with the Greater Manchester and West Midlands, we have also agreed to create a new Mayoral Combined County Authority in the East Midlands, a new Mayoral Combined Authority in York and North Yorkshire, we have expanded the North-East deal and we have also announced devolution county deals with Norfolk and Suffolk.

    I was excited to discover earlier today from the wonderful Anne Handley, the new leader of East Riding, that East Riding and Hull are working together on another potential new devolution deal. We want to be with you every step of the way.

    I am an enthusiast – as you all know – for the mayoral model. But of course, one size rarely fits all. And I want to ensure that counties, district and unitary authorities also enjoy greater powers, greater freedom and greater resources.

    So even as we make sure that our drive for devolution is in keeping with the best traditions of local government, we continue to respect existing structures. Indeed, we seek to strengthen them.

    And we wish to ensure also that a light is shone on the great work local government is doing.

    It is to improve accountability and transparency, and help all councils succeed, that I am today officially launching the Office for Local Government (Oflog).

    By providing targeted data and analysis, Oflog will champion the very best in local government and also help us to identify where councils need targeted support to deliver.

    And Oflog will of course work closely in partnership with the LGA’s Innovation and Improvement board, so ably now chaired by the hugely energetic Abi Brown.

    And we want to make sure that Oflog ensures there is wider appreciation of the innovation and excellence displayed every day by local government.

    Swindon Borough Council, for example, now takes an average of 4 days, instead of 11, to clear up fly-tipping after developing AI software to process reports submitted by residents and then work out the most efficient way for street teams to tackle them. It is also saving around £28,000 a year in fuel and staffing costs.

    And the use of machine translation, another manifestation of AI, by its paediatric therapy team has cut the time to process documents from 3 days to 14 minutes, and the average cost per document from £160 to just 7 pence.

    The technology is now used by the council to support Ukrainian and Afghan arrivals, and by their adult and children social care teams when working with people whose first language is not English. The council has made the tech available for use free of charge to other government bodies and institutions, with hospitals, schools, courts and the Welsh and French governments taking it up.

    Where Swindon leads, the world follows.

    At Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council, we’ve also seen innovation. Far more children have an education, health and care plan (EHCP) that meets their needs after those putting the plans together started using a new digital tool to guide them. The percentage of their EHCPs audited as ‘good’ has risen from just 15% to 88%, while those rated ‘inadequate’ have fallen from around 29% to just 1.7%.

    Delivery on the ground from a council putting innovation first.

    And also City of Wolverhampton Council with its Digital Wolves strategy is supporting our key levelling up mission to enhance connectivity by extending 5G coverage.

    Wolverhampton goes all-out to improve broadband connectivity among residents and it has taken full advantage of being among the first cities to host a commercial 5G accelerator.

    These are just 3 of many examples of innovation and excellence in the public sector being pioneered by local government and I want to see it celebrated.

    Oflog is there to celebrate that ingenuity and imagination.

    As you will know, I confirmed in January that Lord Morse will be the first chair of Oflog. We have appointed Josh Goodman, a brilliant civil servant who set up the highly successful Covid Shielding programme, as interim chief executive and have launched a recruitment campaign for the permanent role today – I want to make sure we get a wide range of excellent candidates so anyone here with a CV they want to send, I look forward to seeing it.

    Oflog is about supporting you to get on with the job of running local government and delivering for residents and communities.

    And we will work with you to establish the best indicators of performance that will be upheld via Oflog.

    And Oflog should also support us and the department in another vital way. And that is identifying potential problems in councils earlier.

    We all know that there have been local authorities where problems have arisen – notably Thurrock, Liverpool, Croydon, Slough and most recently Woking.

    A handful of cases, the exception…but the problems did not happen all at once – they were there for some time, and they worsened over time.

    We, collectively and in the department, I think, need to be able to respond to the warning signs.

    These failures are felt most acutely by taxpayers and residents in higher costs and worse services. The reputation of local government as a whole and the many excellent officers also suffers. As does the cause of devolution for which we all want to be making such a strong case.

    Where government intervention is needed to deal with these problems – in the most serious cases – we must be able to take targeted action. The Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill strengthens our ability to act to protect taxpayers where trouble is brewing.

    But we must also remember that these are a small minority of councils – outliers of concern in a sector characterised by excellence – but we must reflect seriously on what these exceptional cases tell us about how core parts of the framework work in practice. But we must also ensure that framework is designed in a way to support our delivery of services. We need in order to ensure that we both identify problems early and free you to do you even better to reform the external audit system.

    It’s just not working at the moment. We need to tackle the delays in external audit and are talking to firms, council representatives and others on concrete steps that will get us back to a system where we all have faster and more effective, swifter and less bureaucratic reassurance in the way money is being used and my colleague Lee Rowley is leading on this work which has long been overdue.

    Where we do intervene, we need to ensure it is rooted in a clearly understood and agreed framework. That is why we are announcing a consultation on new statutory guidance around responsibilities for Best Value.

    I’d like to thank everyone who contributed to the draft. In setting out the expected standards of good practice by 7 themes, and describing the characteristics of a well-functioning authority, it serves to highlight how many councils are doing an excellent job for their communities.

    I know how much we all want to drive prosperity at a local level and in our services – and we are using every tool we have to drive economic development and opportunity that will benefit everyone. And that must include at this point, specifically, critically, centrally, rising to the many challenges of the housing market.

    The government remains committed absolutely to achieving 300,000 homes a year by the mid-2020s and delivering one million homes over this Parliament – we set it out in our manifesto and we are absolutely committed.

    You don’t need me to tell you that all of us who want to see more housebuilding – and greater homeownership – nevertheless face challenges in a world of rising interest rates, inflationary pressures and tight labour markets. These challenges are very far from unique to the United Kingdom. Talking to colleagues in government in Ireland, exactly the same issues affect their housing market and their home ownership ambitions.

    My colleagues, the Prime Minister and Chancellor, are using every tool to meet and master these inflationary pressures and in DLUHC we are determined to work with you on the ground to expand opportunity in the housing market.

    We need to build more homes of every tenure. We need more social and affordable homes. And councils of course have a critical role to play. I want to see all of us – central government, Homes England, housing associations and councils – working together to build more homes for social rent.

    That’s why I announced last month that local authorities should be allowed to keep 100% of the receipt from a right-to-buy sale for 2 years. I know that the LGA championed this move, with James Jamieson making his customary compelling case and Shaun supporting him in this work, and we look forward to working with local authorities to capitalise on the additional money, freedom and flexibility.

    As well as building more social homes we also need to work with the private sector to deliver more homes for rent and more homes to buy.

    And here again I must thank James and the LGA team for their leadership.

    They helped us craft the reforms to the planning system in the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill. Those reforms are designed to address the weaknesses in our current planning system and to rebalance incentives so more communities can be involved in plan-making, more plans can be adopted and more houses built.

    We know at the moment there are many local authorities without plans in place, and many communities concerned about the wrong type of development in the wrong places.

    Through the reforms in the Levelling Up Bill, we will strengthen the place of neighbourhood plans, we give local authorities the power to protect areas of environmental importance, we strengthen the place of design codes and give authorities more control over the character, the quality, the beauty of development.

    We also give local authorities more power to tackle land-banking to ensure planning permissions are built out.

    Crucially, we make it easier to use compulsory purchase powers and cheaper to acquire land through compulsory purchase order by tackling hope value. And, importantly, we also ensure that local authorities capture more of the land value uplift when planning permission is granted with the new Infrastructure Levy.

    Making new developments beautiful, ensuring they are accompanied by the right infrastructure – roads, schools and GP surgeries.

    Strengthening democratic control over where new developments go.

    Making sure the environment is protected and biodiversity is enhanced.

    And strengthening neighbourhood plans to create liveable, walkable, human scale communities.

    That is, I believe, the way to incentivise and support new development.

    The principles I have outlined – beauty, infrastructure, democracy, environment, neighbourhood – B, I, D, E, N – spell BIDEN.

    And if I say I am unashamedly pro-BIDEN I hope none of you will take that amiss…

    One more thing – if the planning system is to work it needs more resource, more expertise, and more planners.

    That is why we are surging additional planning resource to the frontline. I have asked the department and Homes England to look at plans to go even further. I hope to be able to update you all on progress shortly.

    And of course whether it is planning or in any area, if councils are to be empowered to deliver, then we need to help make funding simpler, more rational and predictable.

    The 2-year blueprint for local government finances published last year should help support long-term fiscal planning, as will the settlements for trailblazer deeper devolution.

    Over the last 3 spending reviews, local government has seen real terms increases in core spending power – with up to £59.7 billion available in England, an increase of up to £5.1 billion on the previous year.

    Over the last 12 months the DLUHC ministerial team has, rightly, sought to ensure that the funding system that will deliver certainty and stability for the remainder of this Parliament.

    For this I want to thank Lee Rowley – a former councillor himself – Dehenna Davison, Rachel Maclean and Felicity Buchan and, most of all, our wonderful Lords minister, Jane Scott, who was an outstanding leader of Wiltshire Council.

    As a team, we are committed to hearing from you about what works best and also critically what more is needed.

    And we know that while we have made progress on devolution, on accountability, on housing and planning and in other areas, there is still more to be done on the reform of funding to local government.

    The system we have now doesn’t work everywhere.

    It is out-of-date.

    There desperately needs to be a fairer, more rational allocation of resources across authorities.

    Also, there need to be fewer ringfences and individual funding pots.

    There need to be more rewards for councils that transform their communities: in the form of incentives to drive meaningful local growth.

    And I believe we will find the solutions together. Moving from complexity to a simpler set-up is in itself a significant undertaking.

    That is why we will engage and consult with you to create a system that both meets the needs of all of our citizens and can withstand economic shocks and inflationary pressures.

    And I look forward to updating you all on the progress of the work that we make.

    But where we can take action quickly, we will. We know the sheer number of funds has become difficult to navigate and deliver.

    The billions of pounds allocated so far through the Levelling Up and Shared Prosperity Funds are, I believe, genuinely transformative but we are always looking for ways to improve how that money and money from other funds reaches you.

    Today, we are publishing the government’s plan for a new, simpler, landscape for local authorities, in line with our white paper commitment.

    That will change how not just DLUHC but how other departments deliver funding.

    We have a commitment to a new digital service that will let you access and monitor your funding flows more easily.

    And we are planning other measures to ease the admin burden – streamlining data and paperwork requirements that you face  to make the most of the money being invested in your communities.

    Ten pilot local authorities will be able to spend their existing funding pots – allocated through the Towns, Levelling Up and Future High Streets programmes – more flexibly.

    And all local authorities that have Towns, Levelling Up and Future High Streets funding will also have more flexibility over their projects – I can confirm that they will be free to make output, outcome and funding changes up to a threshold of 30% without needing to seek any departmental approval.

    We will also change how government provides local growth funding to local authorities, and we will increasingly move towards the use of allocation rather than competition.

    I do believe that an element of competition in the allocation of funds can help encourage innovation, but you can have too much of a good thing.

    From next year, all departments must consider whether they can use existing funds to deliver new money or can use an allocation methodology to distribute it rather than launching another new competition. This must be done before any new fund is launched.

    And where we can improve existing fund allocation we will. So we will take a new approach to the next round of the Levelling Up Fund. We have heard your concerns and will announce further details shortly.

    Listening, learning, reforming, improving – governing is a journey…

    All of us, whatever our political backgrounds or traditions, go on that journey, travelling hopefully, because we want to improve the lives of others.

    One of the great privileges of working in the job I have is seeing how much you all do for the greater good in the jobs you do.

    Strengthening your hand is my mission –

    Working with you is my duty –

    And delivering for everyone is our goal.

    Thank you.

  • PRESS RELEASE : UN HRC53 – Statement on Internally Displaced Persons [July 2023]

    PRESS RELEASE : UN HRC53 – Statement on Internally Displaced Persons [July 2023]

    The press release issued by the Foreign Office on 4 July 2023.

    UK Statement for the Enhanced Interactive Dialogue on Internally Displaced Persons.

    Thank you, Mr President.

    With over 70 million internally displaced persons around the world, the UK thanks the Special Rapporteur’s work to raise awareness and coordinate action.

    The UK recognises internal displacement cannot be seen purely as a humanitarian challenge, and a transition to a development-led solutions approach is crucial. We were glad to see reference in the report on the value of engaging a variety of actors from across different sectors to help effectively deliver this transition.

    Within this context, it is also our collective responsibility to make sure that the role of human rights in ensuring the protection of IDPs is not forgotten. Consequently, we highlight the disproportionate impacts of internal displacement on marginalised groups and the most vulnerable, and urge that their needs are considered in the delivery of assistance and development of durable solutions. We encourage particular attention to women and girls, who, due to specific vulnerabilities and discrimination, face additional barriers to the effective realisation of their rights.

    Finally, whilst States may hold primary responsibility for the prevention of internal displacement, the UK recognises the role of the international community to assist with the fulfilment of this responsibility, and is pleased to be supporting the work of the UN Special Adviser on Internal Displacement.

    Thank you.

  • Wendy Chamberlain – 2023 Speech on the Privileges Committee Special Report

    Wendy Chamberlain – 2023 Speech on the Privileges Committee Special Report

    The speech made by Wendy Chamberlain, the Liberal Democrat MP for North East Fife, in the House of Commons on 10 July 2023.

    The initial Privileges Committee investigation into the former Prime Minister, the then Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip, has set a clear and fundamental precedent. If a Prime Minister deliberately misleads this House and, by extension, the public, there will be consequences. I put on record my thanks to the hon. and right hon. Members who served on the Privileges Committee. Considering the weighty matter of whether a former Prime Minister misled the House was clearly a significant task, and it is regrettable that, as the report outlines, the actions of some hon. and right hon. Members made the task harder for Members serving on the Committee. As we have heard, that was not without personal consequences for those Members.

    As the Leader of the House pointed out in her opening remarks, there are ways and means of raising issues of privilege. We should remember that the investigation had its genesis in a motion that was passed in this House without Division; not a single Member named in the report voted against the motion. Not only is the Committee cross party, but it has a Conservative majority. It is worth pointing out that there is no Liberal Democrat on the Committee, but I accept as an individual MP that the current process involves a cross-party group of MPs, and they are trusted by this House to investigate with impartiality and to make their findings available for consideration by the House. Those recommendations are then to be approved or rejected by this House. Had Boris Johnson been suspended from Parliament for more than 10 days and chosen to remain an MP, it would have been up to the people of Uxbridge to determine whether they wanted to re-elect him as their MP. Members from all parts of the House must make it clear that we will not tolerate attempts to undermine or attack the vitally important work of this Committee.

    We were promised integrity, accountability and professionalism at all levels of government, and I have to note, like the shadow Leader of the House, the hon. Member for Bristol West (Thangam Debbonaire), the current Prime Minister’s steadfast refusal to declare where he stands on this issue, let alone to engage with the substantive content of this report and the previous one. That is an abdication of his duty not only as Prime Minister but as an individual MP. It is unfortunate.

    The hon. Member for Wallasey (Dame Angela Eagle) said she was pleased that the report was not amended, but there is a sign of weakness from the Government, where they have said “no, thank you” to the offer in the Privileges Committee’s report. It stated:

    “It will be for the House to consider what further action, if any, to take in respect of Members of the House referred to in this special report.”

    I would go as far as to suggest that had the Government taken the opportunity to make some process clear following today’s report, they might have seen off some of the accusations of lack of due process that we have heard today from Members named in the report and those supporting them. Today should have served as an opportunity to set another precedent and to make it clear that there are consequences for those who seek to obstruct the important work of a cross-party, independent Committee. It is a shame that the Government have not done so. That is why I tabled my amendment.

    I accept that my amendment has not been selected, but the clear route forward would have been for the Committee to consider whether contempt had been committed and to return a verdict and, if necessary, a sanction. As the right hon. Member for Witham (Priti Patel) said, that could have given her an opportunity to make her case in relation to what has been reported. The same process was used for the Committee’s report into the former Prime Minister, Mr Johnson. I also point out that today’s debate does not shut the window on that opportunity. The Government could bring forward such a motion if they wished at any future point; they could bring it forward tomorrow, and I hope they do so.

    This place is still suffering from the Owen Paterson decision, because that was the point where the convention of this House to accept Privileges Committee and Standards Committee reports on the nod was broken by the Government. Now is the time for a reset.

  • Priti Patel – 2023 Speech on the Privileges Committee Special Report

    Priti Patel – 2023 Speech on the Privileges Committee Special Report

    The speech made by Priti Patel, the Conservative MP for Witham, in the House of Commons on 10 July 2023.

    I have found the debate thus far more than interesting for a number of reasons. A great deal has been said and commented upon in terms of parliamentary procedure and respect for one another, both of which I absolutely support, but also in terms of some of the selective quotes in the report, which have been echoed today, and how they are ascribed to certain Members who have been named in the report. Some of it has been taken out of context, and I will reflect on that point. I do not think that it is healthy for this wonderful Parliament to end up making generalised assumptions and assertions about individuals based on the annex to the report. That is why I wanted to speak today.

    Clearly, I am named in the annex and referenced in paragraph 14. As someone who has had claims made about their actions in the report, and who has been named and had judgments passed on their conduct both by the Committee and so far in the debate—totally inaccurate judgments, if I may say so—I think it is right that I get, at least, a right of reply. I am incredibly respectful of process, not just because I have served in Government, but because being a parliamentarian is the greatest honour we all have, and upholding our traditions, our democracy and parliamentary standards is absolutely right. However, although I appreciate that right hon. and hon. Members may disagree with me, including the Chair of the Committee, who is entitled to do so, I feel that the assertions and claims made in this special report are wrong and cannot be substantiated by the so-called evidence that has been produced and published.

    Sir Desmond Swayne

    Did my right hon. Friend collude in any way with any of the persons listed in the report, or with anyone else, to place pressure on the Committee?

    Priti Patel

    That comes back to the evidence and the point that I was about to make. The answer is: absolutely not. I just do not think it appropriate that, unless the evidence is provided and published, there is an absence of process by the Committee. I do not know if the annex is an exhaustive list of Members of this House—the Chair of the Committee is very welcome to respond to my comments—but it seems quite selective and exclusive. That is why it is important to have this debate and discussion.

    Allan Dorans

    On 16 March 2023, during an interview on GB News, the right hon. Lady said:

    “the lack of accountability…I think there is a culture of collusion quite frankly involved here.”

    Can I have some evidence of that please?

    Priti Patel

    I will come to that particular quote, so the hon. Gentleman will hear what I have to say then.

    I come back to my point on whether the annex is conclusive. Should other individuals in the House have been included in it? On what basis were decisions made? At the outset I put it clearly on the record that it is wrong of Members to seek to place undue and improper pressure on any Members investigating matters at a Committee level. There are processes in place, and it is right that they should be respected. I believe that there is a case for looking at how the processes of this Committee can be clarified, and how the members of that Committee and the persons who are subject to inquiries are protected. From my experience of the handling of all this, I can say that to be named in a report having had no notification—no correspondence or anything of that nature—that I was being investigated for prior conduct—

    Thangam Debbonaire indicated dissent.

    Priti Patel

    The shadow Leader of the House shakes her head, but I just do not think that that is acceptable. We have heard great speeches on having respect for one another, and I agree completely. We must treat each other with civility: if we intend to name another Member in the Chamber, we let them know beforehand. That is an important part of the process.

    We have heard about lobbying and collusion. As one who has served in government, as Home Secretary, I have been involved in all sorts of quasi-judicial policy and decision making on high-profile and complex issues, day in, day out, much of which was the subject of quite active lobbying by Opposition Members. We live in a democracy, and we should be able to have these discussions. All Ministers know that orchestrated campaigns and lobbying are absolutely day-to-day things that go on; that is part of a democracy—the values and safeguards of free speech and freedom of expression. A democracy recognises the value and the importance of challenging and questioning processes and decision making. That is one reason why we are all here as elected Members of Parliament: we do this on behalf of our country and our constituents, and because we have a democratic responsibility to do it.

    In doing that, we raise uncomfortable questions all the time. That is what we do, day in, day out. To silence and cancel out the comments and voices of individuals carries great risk, and I am very worried about that. It causes me grave concern. That is why the decision on the motion must be taken carefully.

    Lloyd Russell-Moyle (Brighton, Kemptown) (Lab/Co-op)

    The right hon. Lady is making a good case that we need to treat each other with respect. Is claiming that a Committee has been involved in collusion, as she did on GB News, part of that respect?

    Priti Patel indicated dissent.

    Lloyd Russell-Moyle

    Well, it is what is written here. Does the right hon. Lady deny that she said it?

    Priti Patel

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention.

    It is important that there is due process, and it seems to me that the report does not deliver the guidance and the processes that would be helpful to the House when dealing with matters that have been considered by the Privileges Committee. That is because the report is not concerned with establishing or recommending new processes and protections, and we should not sit here pretending that it is. This report has been used by the Committee to criticise and censure individuals. The House should reflect on that in the light of my comments.

    The House will set, in my view, a dangerous precedent if it approves a report that censures and passes judgment on Members of the House without granting due process—fair due process, I should add—to the Members it makes allegations about.

    Andy Carter (Warrington South) (Con)

    My right hon. Friend knows that I was a member of the Committee. Along with every other member of the Committee, I was clear that there is no censure in the report. Will she clarify what she means by censure? That was certainly not what the Committee intended.

    Priti Patel

    By that, I mean cancelling out views and opinions. That is totally different—

    Dame Angela Eagle indicated dissent.

    Priti Patel

    Would the hon. Lady like to intervene? She is very welcome to. She has spoken. With respect, she also asked for civility in the Chamber and in the way in which we engage with one another. Everyone has strong opinions and, with that, it is right and respectful that we listen to each other.

    Andy Carter rose—

    Dame Angela Eagle

    Will the right hon. Lady give way?

    Priti Patel

    I will give way to my hon. Friend first and then I will come to the hon. Lady.

    Andy Carter

    I think every member of the Committee firmly believes that every Member of Parliament has the right to share their opinions in this House, but the 2019 House of Commons code for Members is very clear: Members must not lobby the Committee, or the Commissioner in a manner calculated to influence their consideration of issues related to conduct. The current Members’ code of conduct does not mention that the Privileges Committee should be included in that. This report suggests that that should be amended so that Members serving on the Privileges Committee are also afforded those rights. I do not want any Member of Parliament to be prevented from saying what they believe once a report is published, but not during the process of producing a report.

    Priti Patel

    With respect, I have heard what my hon. Friend has had to say, but if he had listened to what I have had to say, he would know that I am worried that this will set a dangerous precedent.

    Dame Angela Eagle

    I was going to make a very similar point to the one that the hon. Member for Warrington South (Andy Carter) has just made. Does the right hon. Member agree that this is not about criticising a report once it is published? It is about not trying to nobble it while it is going on.

    Priti Patel

    With all respect to the hon. Lady, in her remarks today, she used a range of phrases, which she scatter-gunned around the Chamber, in an accusatory way about what individuals have said or may not have said. She cannot apply that to all of us, so I think she should have been careful in some of the phrases that she used.

    If I may, I will comment further about my concerns with the process. My hon. Friend the Member for Great Grimsby (Lia Nici) touched on an important point, about which Mr Speaker is also very clear—he is a strong proponent of the concept that important matters should come to the House first, before they are published in the media. As she pointed out regarding the publication of Committee reports, paragraphs 15.10 and 38.56 of “Erskine May” refer to the premature publication and disclosure of Committee proceedings as being in contempt. Cakeism is a phrase that has already been used this afternoon by my right hon. Friend the Member for North East Somerset (Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg). We cannot have it both ways.

    I recognise the Committee’s frustrations that the report was leaked, and I know that comments have been made when the Government did not come to the House before announcing things in the media. However, we have to be concerned that details contained in the special report were published by a particular newspaper at 7.20 pm on Wednesday 28 June, some 13 hours and 40 minutes before the special report was published, and before people named in its annex were informed.

    Frankly, given how this has all been conducted—individuals were not contacted in advance and there was no right of reply—is the House not concerned that that newspaper, The Guardian, knew of the report’s contents before the rest of us did? Surely that should be a matter for investigation as well. If the Committee is so concerned with cases of contempt of the House, investigating how the report or its contents were leaked to The Guardian before it was published is something else that should feature in due process.

    Would any members of the Committee or its Chair like to explain why that newspaper knew in advance, before the rest of us? What action is going to be taken? We have already heard talk about restoring parliamentary democracy and integrity to Parliament. Again, that would give confidence to Members that due process was being followed, but it would also give confidence to the public, who also expect standards across the board to be upheld.

    We have a report from the Committee that names Members and peers, but it did not inform us in advance. We have discussed already the House’s rules on behaviour and courtesies. I personally think that Members should be given notice; that is respectful. During my time serving on the Front Bench, or on the Back Benches, as I am now, I hope that I have never offended a Member of this House by being so discourteous as to name them without informing them in advance. That is a good standard that we should all live up to.

    Not only has there been a lack of courtesy shown to Members named in the report, but the absence of due process concerns me a lot. Until this was published, I and colleagues had no idea that we were being investigated, or that there were references to us as individuals in the annex in relation to the inquiry into Mr Johnson.

    Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)

    Will the right hon. Lady give way?

    Priti Patel

    I did not see the Member appear at the start, but I will give way.

    Mr Perkins

    I have been here for all of the right hon. Lady’s speech and, over the 14 minutes of it,, I have been desperately hoping she was going to get to the point she really wants to raise. She does not disagree that she said the things that are in the report, but she thinks it is discourteous that she was not told in advance. She thinks other people may have said things that were missed out of the report. What is actually the main point of what, over the last 14 minutes, she has been saying?

    Priti Patel

    If the hon. Gentleman had the courtesy of listening, the point is actually due process. As he would know, if he had listened to my opening remarks, I also said that I was sure not everyone here would agree with what I was about to say, but affording the courtesy of debate in this House was exactly why we were here. If he does not want to hear what I am saying, he might actually want to leave the Chamber, rather than carrying on in this way. It is important in the debate to have a right of reply. Again, I appreciate that he and other Members will disagree with this, but I think it is right that the basics should be put on the public record. The country is watching. Well, some of the country is watching, if they are not watching Wimbledon right now, but this is an insight into how we engage in our business, and what right of reply Members do or do not have. Quite frankly, this will affect all Members; it is not just about supporting those today, because there will be others in the future and that is important.

    Some of the language that has been used is important as well. I personally think that it simply cannot be right or fair for a Committee to make claims or assertions without giving notice in advance, or the chance to at least respond to allegations. I am going to go as far as to say, if I may, that I found some of this deeply secretive and I just do not think that Select Committees operate in this way; they really do not. I have had the great privilege of serving on a number of Select Committees and I think the way in which we conduct ourselves is very important.

    I notice that the Leader of the House said that this is deeply unusual. It is all deeply unusual, and not just because of a lack of process. My office, supported by the House of Commons Library, undertook some research to see if there was any precedent for MPs being named, and effectively or potentially sanctioned or censured in a report by a Committee. [Interruption.] No, I am giving an example. I hear what the hon. Member for Wallasey (Dame Angela Eagle) says, but I am just giving an example—colleagues might learn something from this, too. Even the Library said that it could not think of any Committee on Standards, Privileges Committee, or former Committees on Standards recommending anything of this nature without the opportunity for those named to make their case. Today is a chance at least to give that a bit of an airing and to make the case as well.

    I will conclude my remarks. Again, in the light of what I have said thus far, there are so many issues here that I think will have wide implications for Parliament, if I may say so, and for Members of Parliament. I have touched on process. The evidence issue—the lack of evidence that the Committee has presented—has been touched on as well. Paragraph 14 makes serious allegations that I and other Members were part of a co-ordinated campaign of interfering with the work of the Privileges Committee, so one would expect those claims to be backed up with some serious volumes of evidence, but they are not. While the Committee may obviously disagree with Members, the fact that people can now freely express views about the inquiry is obviously part of living in a healthy democracy, with free speech and freedom of expression. However, the Committee has not explained in this report how the expression of an opinion or a view that some people shared could in itself undermine the work of the Committee or could be co-ordinated.

    The hon. Member for Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock (Allan Dorans), a member of the Committee, touched on my remarks quoted in the annex. Those remarks came from an interview on Budget day that covered a range of issues: the economy, taxation, the Budget, migration—lively issues that I think all Members in the House like to discuss. We also discussed Mr Johnson, and the activities of a Mrs Sue Gray and the Leader of the Opposition. It is not at all clear from the Committee’s report why it believes that a reference, in a lengthy interview covering multiple issues, to questions over transparency and accountability constitutes interference in its work, could be disturbing, or could be part of a co-ordinated campaign. Those are areas on which we should get clarity.

    So far, the suggestions have been one-way; we have been told that we should go to the Committee if there are issues, but the Committee could have raised any issues with us. The Committee could have done that if it had any concern about comments I made. I am not someone who hides behind the sofa in Parliament; many colleagues will recognise that. I would welcome lively engagement, as I am sure other Members referenced in the annex would have done. I certainly would have welcomed the Committee contacting and engaging with me in good time. That is quite important. Frankly, I think the public will still reach their own conclusions about all this.

    I appreciate that I have detained the House for a lengthy period—I thank hon. Members for listening—but given the tone of the accusations made, the contents of the annex, and the lack of a prior opportunity to respond, it is important that we have this discussion and that colleagues listen. I hope that the Committee will reflect on comments made about process. I really do not think that there is evidence to substantiate the claims that have been made and, if the motion is agreed to, there will be the ongoing matter for the House of what that means for MPs.

    I might be boring for Britain right now, but I believe in transparency, accountability and due process, particularly having sat on the Front Bench; today we have also heard about holding Ministers to account. I believe in all that. Woe betide the Minister who misleads Parliament. Sometimes there is not enough scrutiny of the details of what Ministers say, and not enough challenges. That is why it is important that we have this debate about accountability, transparency, due process, and sometimes correcting the record. I believe, as do other hon. and right hon. Members, in transparency, freedom of speech and Members facing fair and due process when allegations are made about their actions. That should be dealt with properly. I urge Members to think about the impact that the report will have on our parliamentary democracy and our freedoms. I fundamentally believe that, without freedom of speech, there can be no democracy; it is something that we have to preserve, stand up for and respect in this House.

  • PRESS RELEASE : Rishi Sunak meeting with the President of Türkiye [July 2023]

    PRESS RELEASE : Rishi Sunak meeting with the President of Türkiye [July 2023]

    The press release issued by 10 Downing Street on 11 July 2023.

    The Prime Minister met Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan at the NATO Summit in Vilnius today.

    The Prime Minister welcomed Türkiye’s support for Sweden’s accession to NATO and commended President Erdoğan for his efforts.

    The leaders reaffirmed their shared commitment to ensuring the UK-Türkiye relationship reaches its full potential, building on growing trade links and strong defence and security cooperation.

    Discussing opportunities to bolster our bilateral cooperation, including in cutting-edge defence technology and in addressing the shared challenge of illegal migration, the Prime Minister set out that dealing with criminal people smuggling gangs is a key priority for him.

    Both leaders agreed to task their Foreign Ministers to look at areas for closer collaboration on migration and organised crime. The leaders also agreed to deepen intelligence sharing and cooperation on countering terrorism.

    President Erdoğan updated the Prime Minister on President Zelenskyy’s recent visit to Türkiye and the leaders agreed on the importance of ensuring an extension to the Black Sea Grain Deal.

    The leaders agreed to stay in close touch.

  • PRESS RELEASE : UN HRC53 – Interactive Dialogue on Genocide Prevention [July 2023]

    PRESS RELEASE : UN HRC53 – Interactive Dialogue on Genocide Prevention [July 2023]

    The press release issued by the Foreign Office on 4 July 2023.

    Statement for the Interactive Dialogue with the Special Adviser on Genocide Prevention. As delivered by the UK.

    Thank you, Mr President.

    The United Kingdom would like to thank the Special Advisers for their ongoing contribution to flagging atrocity risks to the Secretary-General and UN Member States. We remain committed to atrocity prevention and the responsibility to protect.

    We continue to see atrocities being committed around the world. To highlight one instance, reports of an increase in ethnicity-based violence in Darfur, Sudan, are deeply troubling, and the international community must act to prevent history from repeating itself.

    The responsibility to prevent atrocities cuts across the whole UN system, and we encourage the Office to play a key role in ensuring that an atrocity prevention lens is applied across the UN’s work. We also call on the Office to prioritise drawing information from across the system to inform an effective approach to early warning. Indeed, the UK is working to strengthen our monitoring and analytical capability at the country, regional and global levels.

    Special Adviser, how is your office working with the High Commissioner on Human Rights to gather and use information on human rights globally? Secondly, last year, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination referred the human rights situation in Xinjiang to your Office. We would be grateful for an update on this matter.

    Thank you.

  • PRESS RELEASE : Face-to-face health checks more than double in one year [July 2023]

    PRESS RELEASE : Face-to-face health checks more than double in one year [July 2023]

    The press release issued by the Department of Health and Social Care on 4 July 2023.

    The number of NHS Health Checks offered and carried out more than doubled in 2022 to 2023.

    • 2.9 million NHS Health Checks offered and 1.1 million checks carried out in 2022 to 2023 – more than doubling activity in 2021 to 2022
    • 1.1 million checks estimated to have prevented more than 400 heart attacks and strokes and identified 220,000 people who would benefit from statins
    • Government announced last week the rollout of a new digital health check from spring which will deliver more than one million checks in 4 years

    More than one million people had a face-to-face NHS Health Check last year – more than double the previous year – new data published by the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID) today shows.

    The NHS Health Check helps to prevent heart attacks and strokes and is currently a face-to-face check-up for adults in England aged 40 to 74. It can help spot early signs of stroke, kidney disease, heart disease, type 2 diabetes, or dementia.

    The new data published by OHID shows face-to-face health checks have recovered to pre-pandemic levels thanks to the efforts of local authorities and NHS staff, helping to prevent potentially deadly cardiovascular disease across the country.

    OHID’s data for 2022 to 2023 shows:

    • 2.9 million people were offered a check by local authorities – up from 1.3 million in 2021 to 2022
    • 1.1 million checks were delivered in 2022 to 2023 – up from 500,000 in 2021 to 2022
    • 10.2 million checks offered and 4.3 million carried out between April 2018 and March 2023, despite disruption caused by the pandemic

    Cardiovascular disease is the second biggest killer in England and affects around 6.4 million people. It’s estimated that the 1.1 million checks delivered in 2022 to 2023 helped to avoid over 400 strokes and heart attacks, identified 220,000 people who would benefit from statin medication, and diagnosed 32,000 people with hypertension.

    This follows the announcement last week of a new digital NHS Health Check which will be rolled out in England from spring. It will operate alongside the existing face-to-face scheme, and will deliver an additional one million checks over 4 years.

    Health and Social Care Secretary Steve Barclay said:

    Hundreds of thousands of people have taken action to understand their health and prevent potentially life-threatening conditions like heart attacks and strokes.

    These mid-life MOTs are vitally important in preventing illnesses, easing pressure on the NHS and cutting waiting times – one of the government’s 5 priorities – and I want to encourage anyone who’s offered a check to come forward and take advantage of the offer.

    On the eve of the NHS’s 75th birthday, it’s fantastic to see so many people had a health check last year – and even more will be achieved when the new digital check is rolled out from spring.

    You can have an NHS Health Check if you’re aged 40 to 74 and you have not had a stroke, or do not already have a pre-existing health condition. If this applies to you, you can expect to receive an invite from a GP surgery or local authority for an NHS Health Check every 5 years.

    Each new digital check could save an estimated 20 minutes of NHS time – potentially freeing up hundreds of thousands of appointments in primary care and helping cut NHS waiting times.

    Patients will be able to access the check via a mobile phone, tablet or computer. They will complete an online questionnaire, enter height, weight, and blood pressure measurements, and the results of a blood test.

    The results will be available online and direct people to personalised advice to reduce the risk of a heart attack or stroke, as well as advice to stop smoking and weight management support where appropriate. Referrals to GPs will only be made if further tests and treatment are needed – helping to reduce demand on GP services.

    OHID data on face-to-face NHS Health Checks

  • PRESS RELEASE : UN HRC53 – Joint Statement on human rights situation in Sudan [July 2023]

    PRESS RELEASE : UN HRC53 – Joint Statement on human rights situation in Sudan [July 2023]

    The press release issued by the Foreign Office on 4 July 2023.

    Interactive Dialogue with the Special Adviser to the Secretary General on the Prevention of Genocide. Joint Statement by Sudan Core Group, delivered by the UK.

    Thank you, Mr President.

    This statement is made on behalf of the Core Group on Sudan, comprising Germany, Norway, the United States, and the United Kingdom.

    We welcome the recent statements by both the Special Adviser and the UN Secretary General on the deeply concerning developments across Sudan, and particularly in Darfur.

    Extensive and credible reporting from both Sudanese and international sources, including the Sudan Conflict Observatory and the Global Coalition for the Responsibility to Protect, suggest ongoing and appalling atrocities being committed against civilians, including children, with thousands already reported to have been killed – and a clear risk of further escalation and atrocities, including on the basis of ethnicity.  We share and echo these grave concerns.

    Mr President,

    The Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces must comply with their obligations under international law and fulfil their commitment to protect civilians – which they affirmed in the Jeddah Declaration of Commitment to Protect the Civilians of Sudan.

    We call on the Special Adviser to coordinate and share information with the High Commissioner and his Office as the situation unfolds, and on the High Commissioner to keep this Council updated on developments and risks in Darfur, in line with the prevention mandate given both to him and to this Council.

    Thank you.

  • Angela Eagle – 2023 Speech on the Privileges Committee Special Report

    Angela Eagle – 2023 Speech on the Privileges Committee Special Report

    The speech made by Angela Eagle, the Labour MP for Wallasey, in the House of Commons on 10 July 2023.

    Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker—Madam Deputy Speaker, sorry. I think I got my pronouns mixed up. I rise to support the motion before us today. I am glad that there are no amendments to it, because it is the motion that the Privileges Committee asked to be put before the House in its special report. It is very important that

    “this House notes with approval the Special Report”.

    For us to do that will give us the best chance as a democratic House to put what has been an unprecedented period behind us. It is not usual, as we all know, for a Prime Minister to agree that a Privileges Committee report into what he said on the Floor of this House be sent to the Privileges Committee, as happened in April 2022, with the unanimous support of the House. It is not usual for a Privileges Committee report to involve such high stakes as the one that the members of the Privileges Committee—many of them are sitting here listening to this debate—had to cope with. We have never in my experience—I am not sure that it is even in the history books—had a Privileges Committee of any Parliament put in quite that position. It is therefore to the credit of this House—

    Craig Mackinlay

    Just while we are discussing semantics —I am referring to the interaction that we had on what “impugn” might mean—the right hon. and learned Member for Camberwell and Peckham (Ms Harman) mentioned the words, “with approval”. My interpretation of “with approval” is that every word in this motion is absolute and correct. I have to say that, having heard the evidence, on the first occasion that my hon. Friend the Member for Workington (Mark Jenkinson) has been able to speak as part of this evidence, he raised doubts about what has been published as supposedly coming from him. Am I getting this wrong? My interpretation of approval is that it is all absolutely correct. If that is the case, I am afraid that I have doubts on that front.

    Dame Angela Eagle

    I am sure the hon. Gentleman will do what he thinks is right—I think we can all guess what that will be—when we vote. I note that the way in which this House has traditionally worked is that there are Standing Orders and there is Erskine May, but there are also unwritten assurances about how this House should behave when these issues are before it. Certainly, the Leader of the House was correct to ask, rather philosophically, at the beginning of this debate what had changed to cause the emergence of behaviour that I would not have expected to see when I first came into this House 31 years ago. I would not have expected to see people’s integrity being impugned in quite the way that it has been while they were doing duties that this House had unanimously asked them to do. But, of course, social media did not exist when I first came into this House, and neither did GB News. Before things get any more heated, we need to stop and think about the consequences of allowing the behaviour that we have seen in the past few months, as the Privileges Committee has done its report, to continue.

    It is to the credit of this House that the Privileges Committee’s original report—its fifth report—was debated and carried by such a majority. That puts a line in the sand. It enables us to begin to rebuild the reputation of this House and to use the Privileges Committee to ensure that this House can police itself on the Floor in the Chamber and bring Ministers to account by insisting that they tell the truth.

    The special report, again as the Leader of the House pointed out, is unprecedented, because people have never behaved this way in the past when a Privileges Committee was attempting to carry out the duty that was given to it by a motion that was passed unanimously by the House. It is important, given that similar rules apply to the Committee on Standards, that, in what I hope will be the rare occasions in the future when the Privileges Committee may have to meet to do its job and be convened, it will be allowed to do so.

    As I said to my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Camberwell and Peckham (Ms Harman), if we cannot restore the respect that the Privileges Committee must have to do its job in future, we will have to create an outside body to do it. That would be a very profound constitutional change, with far greater implications for the freedom of people to speak in this House than simply abiding by decency, courtesy and proper rules when the Privileges Committee is meeting.

    Justin Madders (Ellesmere Port and Neston) (Lab)

    Why on earth would outside individuals want to serve on such a body, if they are to be subjected to the kinds of public abuse that we have seen in this case?

    Dame Angela Eagle

    That is the problem, and I think the special report has done us a service by bringing it to the attention of this House. It is something we have to think about as we consider the motion.

    We have been living through febrile times. We have seen two Members of this House assassinated in the past few years while doing their jobs. There is a lot of anger and controversy out there, wound up and heated up by the way social media works. I think everybody in this House, especially those who have been subjected to some of those outside pressures—there will be many Members of this House who have—needs to think very carefully about how they conduct themselves and the kinds of words they use.

    If there is no respect in this House for the Privileges Committee and the things that we try to do to maintain good behaviour and decency in this House, there will be even less respect outside, and that will damage our ability to ensure that our democracy works properly, because without truth there is no democracy. Although this looks like quite a small report, it is a very significant one, and it is important that Members on all sides of the House, whatever faction they are in, consider seriously the implications of not voting for the motion tonight.

    I have to say that, now that a little of the heat has gone out of the situation, I would have liked to see the Members mentioned in the report have the good grace to stand up and apologise to the House for some of the language they have used, such as kangaroo courts, marsupials and comments about “calibre, malice and prejudice”. The House voted for the members of the Committee to be tasked with a very difficult job. Nobody in their right mind would want to find themselves in that position. It is not a nice way to spend parliamentary time—much less attending 30 meetings, under enormous stress and with the outside social media pressures coming in at them from all angles.

    As someone who stood against the leader of my party, I can tell hon. Members that I have had some experience of how that works out. I have also had experience of how what one does in here can translate out there into threatening behaviour and difficulties—[Hon. Members: “We all have!”] Yes, and I said that earlier in my speech, if Conservative Members were listening.

    Therefore, no matter how high the stakes, it is extremely important that when Members comment, they do so within the Standing Orders and the rules of this House, and that they save comments about witch-hunts, kangaroo courts, malice and the rest of it for when the Committee has reported. One unique thing about this House is that while a report is being compiled and evidence is being collected, that Committee cannot respond to what is being put to it in a 24-hour news cycle. It must wait and let its report do the talking.

    I suspect that those Members who tried to blacken the names of those compiling the report, and unleash that kind of process against them, knew exactly what they were doing and knew exactly the pressure they were trying to bring to bear. It is absolutely shameful that some Members named in the report indulged in that kind of behaviour, including two ex-Cabinet Ministers, members of the Privy Council and an ex-Leader of the House—the right hon. Member for North East Somerset —who knows better, and who knows that he knows better than to behave in that way.

    When I came to this House, I never thought that I would see such behaviour. It is to the great detriment of Conservative Members that we have seen such behaviour. I ask them, one last time, to have the grace to get up during the debate and apologise to the House for the way in which they behaved prior to the Privileges Committee publishing its report, and give us an assurance that they will not do it again.