UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Speeches

  • Emily Thornberry – 2025 Speech on the Middle East

    Emily Thornberry – 2025 Speech on the Middle East

    The speech made by Emily Thornberry, the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, in the House of Commons on 1 September 2025.

    I read with alarm yesterday’s report in The Washington Post detailing a plan for the future of Gaza that is circulating among the Trump Administration. They call it the “GREAT” plan. It proposes the total transformation of Gaza into a tourist region—a high-tech hub under temporary US administration. What is going to happen to the Gazans? Well, 2 million of them will be temporarily relocated to other countries, including Somaliland and South Sudan. Forced population transfer is contrary to, and a complete violation of, international humanitarian law.

    Serious thought must be given to the day after for Gaza, and my Committee recommended as much in our report that was published in July, but this unserious, illegal and deeply dystopian plan cannot be the sum of that thinking. What are the Government doing to dissuade Donald Trump from following this path? What, alongside regional and European allies, are we doing to put forward a serious plan for a peaceful future in Israel, Gaza and the west bank that is ready for the day after this terrible war finally comes to an end?

    Mr Lammy

    I am very grateful to my right hon. Friend —my dear friend—for her remarks, and I commend the work of her Committee on the day after and the thoroughness of approach that is required. I have read the reports, but it is speculative stuff that I have seen in different news articles; it is not a comprehensive approach. In my discussions with the US system, I have seen nothing confirmed along the lines of what she said. The day after requires the removal of Hamas; it cannot be about the further displacement of the Gazan people. It is going to require a degree of finance and stability, which I think will require other states, particularly Arab partners. They would set themselves against the sorts of reports I have seen in the papers.

  • Priti Patel – 2025 Speech on the Middle East

    Priti Patel – 2025 Speech on the Middle East

    The speech made by Priti Patel, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, in the House of Commons on 1 September 2025.

    I thank the Foreign Secretary for advance sight of his statement. Let me also express my sympathy for the people of Afghanistan who are suffering as a result of last night’s major earthquake.

    Since the House last met, the awful conflict in the middle east has continued to see lives lost, with intolerable suffering. Hamas continues to refuse the release of all remaining hostages, despite the best efforts of those trying to broker peace. The hostages are now approaching 700 days in captivity, and the whole House will have been sickened by the harrowing clip of the emaciated hostage Evyatar David, which was released by Hamas over the summer. The humanitarian situation in Gaza is dire, and we are all familiar with the reports that we have seen daily on news channels. The inhumane suffering, the recent airstrikes and the inability to provide food for civilians simply cannot go on. We all want an urgent and sustainable end to this conflict. We want to see the release of the hostages from terrorist captivity, and to see aid for the people of Gaza.

    There are key questions for the British Government to answer. The British Government are in a position to help influence those outcomes, but are they actually fully leveraging their ability to do so? The Government’s frequent statements have so far not moved the dial closer to a sustainable end to the conflict, and, as the Foreign Secretary himself has said, we are not in a position to see any alleviation of this horrendous situation. Diplomacy is about putting in the hard yards to find solutions, not just about giving statements, and I therefore want to ask the Foreign Secretary three specific questions.

    First, are the Government taking any new specific action to tighten the screws on Hamas and pile more pressure on them to release the hostages? Should we expect more measures to further degrade Hamas’s ability to finance their campaign of terror? Why are the Government not leading international efforts to produce a credible plan to do exactly that, with an agreement from all the key regional partners and players with an interest in peace to see Hamas leave Gaza? Secondly, can the Foreign Secretary update the House on precisely where we stand and what Britain is contributing to the efforts of the United Nations and our regional allies to broker the release of hostages, and to an end of the conflict? Are we intimately involved, and are we sending in the UK expertise to help, given that we have great expertise when it comes to brokering negotiations of this kind? Thirdly, while we note the Foreign Secretary’s announcement yesterday about support for women and girls, the Government have yet to make essential breakthroughs on aid.

    Ministers must obviously work around the clock with everyone—with all our partners, including the Israelis and multinational institutions—to unblock the situation by coming up with practical solutions, even new solutions, on which all sides can focus when it comes to getting medical and food aid into Gaza. That must provide a significant increase in food and medical supplies reaching civilians while also addressing Israeli concerns about aid diversion, because those concerns are constant. Is the UK working with the multilateral bodies to try to mediate in the divisions and breakdowns of trust that have emerged with the Government of Israel? Is the Foreign Secretary considering schemes similar to those implemented by the Conservative Government, such as the floating piers that, working with the United States and Cyprus, we put in place off the coast of Gaza to get aid in? We need pragmatic and practical solutions to get food and medical supplies to innocent civilians in Gaza.

    Let me now turn to Labour’s decision to recognise a Palestinian state. The Government announced that huge shift in British policy just days after the House went into recess. We all support a two-state solution that guarantees security for both Israelis and Palestinians, but the Foreign Secretary must know that recognising a Palestinian state in September will not secure the lasting peace that we all want to see. Recognition is meaningful only if it is part of a formal peace process, and it should not happen while the hostages are still being held in terrorist captivity and while Hamas’s reign of terror continues. Can the Foreign Secretary explain his plan to go ahead with recognition while hostages are still being held, and while Hamas, who have predictably welcomed and been emboldened by this move, continue to hold on to power in Gaza? What practical measures are we proposing to remove Hamas from Gaza?

    The Foreign Secretary must realise that recognition will not secure the release of the hostages or get aid into Gaza immediately. We must always consider what tools of leverage we have in respect of future peace processes and negotiations that could actually help to establish a two-state solution and peace in the middle east. How will this unilateral action help to advance the best shot that we have at achieving a two-state solution, which is the expansion of the Abraham accords and Saudi normalisation, through which we could also calibrate our actions?

    As for the question of the middle east more broadly, the appalling behaviour of the Iranian regime has gone on for too long, and the regime has brought the initiation of the snapback process on itself. The Iranian people deserve much better. Tehran must never obtain a nuclear weapon, and Conservatives remain clear about the fact that the recent US strikes were necessary. Can the Foreign Secretary tell us whether he believes that Iran has the capability and the intention of recommencing its nuclear programme, and whether his assumption is that the snapback process will be seen through to completion? Can he tell us whether or not he welcomes Israel’s actions regarding the Houthi leadership in Yemen, and can he update the House on how the UK will use this moment to further degrade the Houthis’ ability to carry out the attacks and strikes that we have seen recently?

    Mr Lammy

    I am grateful to the shadow Foreign Secretary for the tone of her remarks. I am pleased that she agrees with me and, indeed, shares the sentiment of the entire House on the dire—as she described it— humanitarian situation in Gaza and the inhumanity that she also described. She will recognise that even before we came to power, the last Government were calling for the ceasefire that we all want to see.

    The right hon. Lady asked what the Government were doing in relation to Hamas. In New York, with our Arab partners, the French and others, we were doing just that—supporting the Prime Minister’s framework for peace, and working with colleagues to establish the circumstances of the day after. We have been crystal clear: there can be no role for Hamas. We need the demilitarisation of Gaza, and we are working with partners to try to set up the trusteeship, the new governance arrangement with Gaza. No Government are doing more than we are. We signed a memorandum of understanding with the Palestinian Authority, and we are working with it on reform in a deliberate, day-to-day action, because there must be a role for it subsequently.

    The right hon. Lady asked what new solutions on aid might be found. That is where I depart with her sentiments, because I am not sure that we need new solutions. We need the old ones: the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, the United Nations Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs, and the World Food Programme. They exist, so let us support them. It was this party that restored funding to UNRWA when it was opposed by the Opposition. Let me say gently to the right hon. Lady that that is not what feeds women and girls. The mechanisms are there, and they work all over the globe. This worked the last time we had a ceasefire, when as many as 600 trucks a day went in, and we can do it once more. That is the position of the UK Government.

    I spoke to Tom Fletcher at the United Nations this morning to get the latest. The moderately good news is that the number of truck movements in August was higher than it was when I last updated the House in July, as the House was going into recess, but he reminded me that 60 or 70 trucks a day was nowhere near the number needed. I found the extra resources today because we know that the medical situation is dire, and the work that we can do with UK-Med is so important and so valued even when we are up against this horrific situation.

    Let me be crystal clear: Hamas is a terrorist organisation. Our demands are unconditional and have not changed. The hostages must be released without delay, and there can be no role for Hamas. But equally, the right hon. Lady will have seen the situation in the west bank. She did not comment on the E1 development running a coach and horses through the idea of two states, which has been the united position of every single party in this Chamber. That is why we set out the plans for recognition. Unless we get the breakthrough that we need on the ceasefire and a full process, we will move to recognition when UNGA meets in New York.

    I am grateful for the right hon. Lady’s support on Iran and the snapback. My assessment is that no country needs the percentages of enriched uranium that we see in Iran. We do not have them in our country. We do not have them at sites like Sellafield and others, including the Urenco site. There is absolutely no need for them. We need a baseline, and that is why we need the inspectors back in. We need to know where the highly enriched uranium has gone, and that is why we have been very clear with the Iranians on the need to trigger snapback. We will see the sanctions come back unless we can reach a diplomatic solution in the next 30 days.

  • David Lammy – 2025 Statement on the Middle East

    David Lammy – 2025 Statement on the Middle East

    The statement made by David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, in the House of Commons on 1 September 2025.

    With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I shall make a statement on the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and Iran.

    In Gaza, the situation on the ground is unimaginably bleak. Horrifying images and accounts will be seared into the minds of colleagues across this House. They are almost impossible to put into words, but we can and must be precise with our language, because on 22 August the United Nations-backed IPC mechanism confirmed what we are witnessing: famine—famine in Gaza city; famine in its surrounding neighbourhoods now spreading across the wider territory; famine which, if unchecked, will spiral into widespread starvation.

    This was foreseen: it is the terrible conclusion of the obstacles we have warned about for over six months. Since 1 July, over 300 people have died from malnutrition, including 119 children. More than 132,000 children under the age of five are at risk of dying from hunger by June next year. This is not a natural disaster; it is a man-made famine in the 21st century, and I am outraged by the Israeli Government’s refusal to allow in sufficient aid. We need a massive humanitarian response to prevent more deaths, crucial non-governmental organisations, humanitarians and health workers to be allowed to operate, and stockpiles of aid on Gaza’s borders to be released. In the past three months, more than 2,000 Gazans have been killed trying to feed their families, and Hamas themselves are exploiting the chaos and deliberately starving Israeli hostages for abhorrent political purposes.

    I know that these words of condemnation, echoed across legislatures all over the world, are not enough, but be in no doubt: we have acted as a country where we can. We restored funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency. We suspended arms exports that could be used in Gaza. We signed a landmark agreement with the Palestinian Authority. We stood up for the independence of international courts. We have delivered three sanctions packages on violent settlers and far-right Israeli Ministers for incitement. We have suspended trade negotiations with the Israeli Government. We are at the forefront of the international community’s work to plan for a stable, post-conflict peace. We have now provided more than £250 million in development assistance over the past two years.

    Today, we are going further. I can announce an additional £15 million of aid and medical care for Gaza and the region. We continue to work alongside regional partners, including Egypt and Jordan, to enable the United Nations and non-governmental organisations to ensure that aid reaches those most in need. Brave medics in Gaza tell us that essential medicines are running out and they cannot operate safely. That is why we are funding UK-Med, whose field hospitals have treated more than 600,000 Gazans. It is also why we are funding the World Health Organisation in Egypt to treat thousands of evacuated Gazan people.

    Meanwhile, as my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary said earlier, we are working with the World Health Organisation to get critically ill and injured children into the UK, where they will receive specialist NHS treatment. The first patients are expected to arrive in the UK in the coming weeks. Extracting people from a war zone is, of course, complex and dangerous, and it relies entirely on Israeli permissions. I am pressing the Israeli Government for that to happen as quickly as possible. We are also supporting brilliant students granted Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office Chevening scholarships and other scholarships to escape Gaza, so that they can take up their places for the coming academic year.

    I recognise that those things only touch the edges of this catastrophe. We all know that there is only one way out: an immediate ceasefire that would see the unconditional release by Hamas of all hostages and a transformation in the delivery of aid. We know it, our US and European allies know it, and our Gulf partners know it, too. I am working night and day with them to deliver a ceasefire and a wider political process to deliver long-term peace. To make a ceasefire last, we need a monitoring mechanism, the disarmament of Hamas and a new governance framework for Gaza. That is the focus of our intense diplomacy in the region.

    In contrast, further military operations in Gaza City will only prolong and deepen the crisis. Together with our partners, we demand an immediate halt to the operation. Each week brings new horrors. Last week’s double strike on Nasser hospital—one of Gaza’s last remaining major health facilities—killed 20 people, including five journalists. I remind Israel once again that international law requires the protection of healthcare workers, journalists and civilians. These actions will not end the war, and they will not bring the hostages home, let alone make them safer, as hostage families have recognised. Such actions will sow despair and anger across the region for generations.

    In the west bank, the Israeli Government are tightening their stranglehold on the Palestinian economy and continue to approve illegal settlement construction, including just recently in the E1 area east of Jerusalem. That would erect a physical barrier to the contiguous Palestinian state, and it must not happen.

    In July, I described before the UN General Assembly our intention to recognise the state of Palestine later this month, unless the Israeli Government take substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza and commit to a long-term sustainable peace. That commitment responds to the current crisis, but stems from our historic responsibility to the region’s security, reaching back over a century to the Balfour declaration. As I said last month in New York, I am deeply proud that it was a British Foreign Secretary who helped establish a homeland for the Jewish people, but the same declaration promised that

    “nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights”

    of the Palestinian people. Those rights are more under threat than at any point in the past century.

    To those who say recognition rewards Hamas or threatens Israeli security, it does neither. Recognition is rooted in the principle of a two-state solution, which Hamas rejects. We have been clear that any Palestinian state should be demilitarised. Indeed, President Abbas has confirmed that in writing. We see no contradiction between the two-state solution and our deep commitment to Israeli security, because security comes from stable borders, not indefinite occupation.

    Before I finish, I would also like to update the House on Iran. On 28 August, the UK, along with France and Germany, triggered the snapback mechanism under UN Security Council resolution 2231. That means that if no new agreement is reached within 30 days, the sanctions that were lifted under the Iran nuclear deal—the joint comprehensive plan of action—will come back into force. Those wide-ranging sanctions include a full arms embargo and restrictions on Iran’s nuclear, missile and drone programme. It was not a decision we took lightly. For years, we have worked with international partners to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. The 2015 deal was meant to do just that, but Iran has repeatedly undermined the agreement. Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium is now 40 times over the limit set by the JCPOA. Despite that clear escalation, we have made every effort over years of negotiations to bring Iran back to compliance. Those efforts have continued in recent months. I have urged Foreign Minister Araghchi to de-escalate and choose diplomacy.

    In July, we offered Iran more time if it agreed to return to negotiations with the US and restore full access to the International Atomic Energy Agency. Last month, I warned Iran that time was short and we would have little choice but to trigger snapback. I regret to inform the House that Iran has not complied with its legal obligations, nor chosen the path of diplomacy, so we have had no choice but to act. I have long been clear that I will not allow snapback to expire without a durable and comprehensive deal. It would be unacceptable to allow this issue to fall off the UN Security Council agenda, despite the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear programme. Snapback is not the end of diplomacy, as Secretary Rubio has also recently underlined. Iran can still meet our conditions. It can restore full IAEA access and address our concerns about its stockpile and enrichment, and it can return to negotiations. Alongside our partners, I will continue to urge Iran to choose that path.

    In the worst of times, this Government will continue to take all the steps that we can to alleviate suffering, to help bring regional conflict to an end and to create the conditions for long-term peace and security. We will not rest until there is a ceasefire in Gaza, the hostages are returned, and a flood of aid reaches those in desperate need. Despite the obstacles before us, we will work with partners to preserve the two-state solution. I commend this statement to the House.

  • Neil Hudson – 2025 Comments on Asylum Seekers, Borders and Migration

    Neil Hudson – 2025 Comments on Asylum Seekers, Borders and Migration

    The comments made by Neil Hudson, the Conservative MP for Epping Forest, in the House of Commons on 1 September 2025.

    Home Secretary, please: we have a tinder-box situation in Epping. We have the Bell hotel, with alleged sexual and physical assaults, and now twice-weekly major protests, some of which became violent, with injuries to police officers. Appallingly, last week the Government successfully appealed against the injunction on the hotel, prioritising the rights of illegal migrants over the rights and, indeed, safety of the people of Epping. Our community is in distress. The situation is untenable. This week the schools are back. The hotel is in the wrong place, right near a school, and many concerned parents have contacted me. When will the Home Secretary and the Government listen to us, address this issue and do the right and safe thing: close the Bell hotel immediately?

    Yvette Cooper

    I agree that all asylum hotels need to be closed as swiftly as possible, including the Bell hotel. That needs to be done in an orderly and sustainable manner so that they are closed for good. The hon. Gentleman is not right in the characterisation of the Government’s case, because we are clear that all asylum hotels need to close. We need to ensure that that is done in an ordered way that does not simply make the problem worse in other neighbouring areas or cause the kind of disordered chaos that led to the opening of so many hotels in the first place. We also need to strengthen the security and the co-operation with policing, and we want to strengthen the law on asylum seekers who commit offences and can be banned from the system. That will be part of our Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill as well.

  • Lisa Smart – 2025 Speech on Asylum Seekers, Borders and Migration

    Lisa Smart – 2025 Speech on Asylum Seekers, Borders and Migration

    The speech made by Lisa Smart, the Liberal Democrat Home Affairs spokesperson, in the House of Commons on 1 September 2025.

    I am grateful to the Home Secretary, as always, for advance sight of her statement.

    Anyone with any sense knows that the Conservatives trashed our asylum system and left the backlog spiralling out of control, with applications for asylum routinely taking years to process. Some of the Home Secretary’s remarks are welcome, but I worry that this Government risk repeating some of the same mistakes.

    The Liberal Democrats will closely scrutinise the plan that the Home Secretary has talked about today, but given that the Home Office itself says that one of the reasons that those human beings seeking asylum make dangerous small-boat crossings is the lack of safe, alternative family reunion routes, cutting those back further seems counterproductive, especially when more than half of those granted family reunion visas in the year ending June 2025 were children under 18.

    It is right that the Government have increased the rate of decisions made—those with no right to be here should be sent back swiftly, and those who have a valid claim should be able to settle, work, integrate and contribute to our communities. The backlog is still too large, however, and initial application decisions still take too long. As the Home Secretary stated, a significant share of the backlog comes from appeals. According to the Government’s own figures, in 2024 almost half of rejected asylum applications were overturned on appeal. For applicants from high-grant countries, that proportion was even higher. I would welcome clarity from the Home Secretary on how long it is currently taking to process the average asylum application, and on what concrete steps are being taken to ensure not only that cases are processed more swiftly, but that decisions are right the first time, so that applicants are not left in limbo, the courts are not overburdened and taxpayers are not footing the bill for avoidable delays.

    I welcome the Home Secretary’s encouraging comments about the reciprocal agreement with France. Can she confirm whether the Government plan for that to be scaled up and, if so, when? Given that one of the main drivers of dangerous channel crossings is the absence of safe, legal family reunion routes, does the Home Secretary agree that cutting family reunion rules risks making the small-boat crisis worse, not better?

    The Home Secretary rightly also mentioned the impact on local authorities. When individuals leave hotels, many present as homeless, creating an unsustainable burden on councils, including my own. Will the Home Secretary explain how she is working with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to support councils and ensure that this crisis is not simply shifted from one overstretched system to another?

    In recent weeks, constituents have been in touch with me as they are concerned about the number of flags that have gone up on lampposts around our area. They worry that the flags have been put up by those who seek to divide our community, not bring it together. Patriotism is a good thing. We should be proud of our country. We should be proud that our country welcomed people such as my nan in the 1930s, when she was fleeing the Nazis. We should be proud of our record of doing our bit. We should be proud of the British values I see in action across my community every day.

    I am proud of those police officers who kept everyone safe during the protests at two hotels in my constituency over the summer; proud of those teachers and pupils who welcome new classmates when they have been placed in one of the hotels; and really proud of those who volunteer their time to support new arrivals, whether through local churches or other voluntary groups and charities—because that is what patriotism looks like.

    Yvette Cooper

    I thank the hon. Lady for her remarks and questions. At the heart of the France pilot that we have developed is the principle that those who arrive on dangerous and illegal small boats should be returned, but alongside that we should also have a legal route for those who apply and who go through proper security checks. As part of that, we will seek to prioritise people who have a connection to the UK, such as family groups —people who have family connections to the UK. Families will continue to need to be an underpinning part of the approach. The House will recall that the Ukraine family scheme was an important part of the response to the situation in Ukraine, for which Labour called in opposition.

    The family reunion arrangements are being used differently from how they were used five years ago. The number of people applying for family reunion immediately —before they have a job, a house or any way of being able to support their families—is increasing the homelessness pressures on local authorities at a time when we need them not just to do their bit to help to clear hotels, but, crucially, to provide homelessness support in the local community. It is important to ensure that arrangements for the families of refugees do not put additional pressure on the homelessness support system, so we will set out reforms and ensure that, in the interim, refugees are included in the existing arrangements that apply to all sponsors in the UK for family reunion.

    We need to speed up appeals. The average appeal time is now 54 weeks, which is far too long. Some appeals go on for way longer, meaning people with repeat appeals are in asylum accommodation for years, preventing the closure of asylum hotels that needs to take place, which is why we need the reforms.

    Finally, the hon. Lady raised the issue of flags. I strongly support the flying of flags across the country—we fly the St George’s flag in Pontefract castle each year. As she will know, the Union flag is on the Labour party membership card—[Interruption.] I can show her a copy if she has not seen one. Flags should be an embodiment of bringing our country together—that will be the same in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland—and a way to bring our country together through symbolism.

  • Chris Philp – 2025 Speech on Asylum Seekers, Borders and Migration

    Chris Philp – 2025 Speech on Asylum Seekers, Borders and Migration

    The speech made by Chris Philip, the Conservative MP for Croydon South, in the House of Commons on 1 September 2025.

    I thank the Home Secretary for advance sight of her statement. The Government have now been in office for well over a year, and I think it is fair to say that not even their kindest friends would say they think it has gone well, but listening to her statement, it sounds like she thinks everything is fine and that if there are any problems, it is somehow somebody else’s fault. Is she living in a parallel universe? After over a year in office, she must now take responsibility for what is happening under this Government.

    It was interesting to note that, during her statement, she did not mention her favourite phrase from a year or so ago—namely, that she was going to “smash the gangs.” I wonder why she was so silent on her previously favourite catchphrase. The answer is that it is not going very well. She mentioned National Crime Agency disruptions. Let me gently point out that 84% of those National Crime Agency disruptions that she cited a few minutes ago are classified as not being high impact, and National Crime Agency arrests for organised immigration crime actually went down by 16% in the last financial year. That is hardly smashing the gangs. In fact, the NCA’s arrests for organised immigration crime in that financial year were only 26—a drop in the ocean compared with the tens of thousands crossing the channel.

    It was also rather conspicuous that the Home Secretary did not mention even a word about the numbers illegally crossing the English channel. I wonder why that was. I wonder why she forgot to say a single word about that. The reason, I am afraid, is pretty clear. Far from smashing the gangs, so far this year, 29,000—to be precise, 29,003—illegal immigrants have crossed the English channel. That is the worst year in history, and it is up by 38% compared with last year. That is not success; it is failure. Things are not getting any better; they are getting worse. This Government are failing and everyone can see it. That is why there are protests up and down the country, and where those protests are peaceful, I support them. That is why 75% of the public think the Government are handling immigration and asylum badly. That is a shocking figure; let it sink in.

    Let me turn to hotels. In the nine months before the last general election, 200 hotels were closed down, including the Bell hotel in Epping, but since the election the numbers in asylum hotels have actually gone up by 8%. Had that previous trend of closures continued, there would be no asylum hotels open at all today. I ask the Home Secretary to confirm that she will not reduce hotel usage simply by shunting asylum seekers from hotels into flats and houses in multiple occupation, which are desperately needed by young people. Will she give the House that categoric assurance?

    Last week the Home Secretary’s lawyers said that the rights of illegal immigrants were more important than the rights of local people in places such as Epping. When this was expressly put in those terms to the Education Secretary yesterday on “Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips”, she shamefully agreed. Those statements are a disgrace. Does the Home Secretary realise how angry that makes people feel? It speaks of a Government not on the side of the people in this country. It means the Government appear to care more about the rights of illegal immigrants than our own citizens. Will she apologise for what her lawyers and the Education Secretary said, and will she undertake to ensure that Ministers and their lawyers will never say that again?

    The Home Secretary talks about her returns deal with France. It has been reported that the deal will return only about 50 people a week, amounting to 6% of arrivals. Does she accept that allowing 94% of illegal arrivals to stay will act as no deterrent at all? If she does not accept that figure of 50 a week, will she tell the House exactly how many immigrants crossing the channel will in fact be returned under her deal? She may recall that back in July we were told by the Government that the first returns would happen “within weeks”. Will she confirm to the House that the number that has actually been returned so far is precisely zero?

    The Home Secretary said to the House a couple of minutes ago that there would be security checks on those people reciprocally taken from France into the UK, but will she confirm that her agreement with France says expressly that the French Government will not provide the UK Government with any information at all—any personal data about those migrants—so if there are criminal convictions or suspicions about extremism or terrorism, the French Government will not provide information to us? If that is true, as her agreement says, how can she possibly conduct security checks?

    The Home Secretary talked about tweaks to family visa rules. Let me be clear about the Opposition’s position on this. If someone enters this country illegally, they should not be allowed to bring in any family members. In fact, everybody entering this country illegally should be immediately removed, to their country of origin if possible, and if that is not possible, to a safe third country such as Rwanda—a scheme which she cancelled just days before it was due to start. The public expect that approach—an approach which she cancelled—because the numbers crossing the channel so far this year have been the worst ever; the worst in history.

    It is not just that the numbers are high. Hundreds of migrants, having crossed the channel and living in those hotels, have been charged with criminal offences, including sexual assaults on girls as young as eight years old and multiple rapes. This is not just a border security crisis; it is a public safety crisis as well, and people up and down this country are furious. That is why they are protesting, and that is why 75% of the public think this Government are failing on asylum and immigration.

    If this Government were serious about fixing this problem, they would know that little tweaks here and there are not enough. Tweaks to article 8 are not going to be enough. Tweaking the family reunion rules is not enough. Returning maybe 50 people a week, if we are lucky, to France is not going to be enough. Intercepting maybe a few boats—worthy though that is—is not going to be enough. The only way these crossings will stop—the only way we are going to get back control of our borders—is if everybody crossing the channel knows that they will be returned. We tabled a Bill in Parliament a few weeks ago to do that. We had a plan to do that: the Rwanda Bill. We need to go further by disapplying to immigration matters the entire Human Rights Act 1998, not just tinkering with article 8. If the Government were serious, that is what they would do.

    If the Home Secretary really wants to control our borders, and if she really wants to get down the record numbers that have been crossing on her watch, she would back our plan, disapply the Human Rights Act in its entirety to immigration matters, and ensure that every single person crossing the channel is immediately removed.

    Yvette Cooper

    I worry about the shadow Home Secretary’s amnesia. In the 14 years that the Conservatives were in government, they never managed to do any of the fantasy things that he claims they did. Let us come back to reality from his fantasy rhetoric.

    The shadow Home Secretary talked about the approach that his Government were taking before the election. It is worth reminding the House of what that approach was. Asylum decisions dropped by 70%. The Conservatives effectively had a freeze on taking asylum decisions, and they were returning those asylum seekers nowhere—not to France, not to the safe countries that people had passed through, and not to Rwanda, despite running that scheme for over two years with only four volunteers going at a cost of £700 million. Their approach left us with a soaring backlog. Had we continued with that totally failed approach—not taking asylum decisions, not returning people anywhere—there would have been tens of thousands more people in asylum accommodation and hotels across the country right now. That is the kind of chaos that his policies were heading towards. It is the kind of chaos that he is promising again now.

    The House will remember the shadow Home Secretary’s personal record. Small boat arrivals went up tenfold on his watch as immigration Minister. Fewer than 1,000 asylum seekers were in hotels by the time he became immigration Minister, but there were more than 20,000 by the time he left his post. On his new concern for local councils, he was the immigration Minister who wrote to local authorities to tell them that he was stopping the requirement on them to agree to accommodation and that he had

    “instead, authorised Providers to identify any suitable properties that they consider appropriate.”

    We agree with communities across the country that asylum hotels must all close, and I understand why individual councils want to take action in their areas, but I say to the shadow Home Secretary that a party that wants to be in government should have a proper plan for the whole country, and not just promote a chaotic approach that ends up making things worse in lots of areas. That is the Conservatives’ record. We have asylum hotels in the first place because the Conservatives did no planning and let the Manston chaos get out of control. As immigration Ministers, both the shadow Justice Secretary, the right hon. Member for Newark (Robert Jenrick), and the shadow Home Secretary rushed around the country opening hotels instead of taking a practical, steady approach to get to the heart of the problem, reduce the asylum system, strengthen our border security and tackle and reform the appeals that are causing huge delays.

    Let me make a final point. The Government strongly believe that sex offenders should be banned from the asylum system altogether. That is why we have put those details into the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, which the shadow Home Secretary’s party has voted against time and again and is still resisting in the House of Lords. If Opposition parties supported and worked with us, that law could be on the statute book and we could have stronger powers against sex offenders, stronger counter-terrorism powers to go after criminal gangs, and stronger powers to tackle the offences being committed in the channel and across the country.

    The trouble is that what the Conservatives are doing in opposition is an even worse version of what they did in government: ramping up the rhetoric with policies that would make the chaos worse. This Government will fix the chaos that we inherited and strengthen our border security for the sake of the whole country.

  • Yvette Cooper – 2025 Statement on Asylum Seekers, Borders and Migration

    Yvette Cooper – 2025 Statement on Asylum Seekers, Borders and Migration

    The statement made by Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, in the House of Commons on 1 September 2025.

    With permission, I will update the House on the actions we are taking with France to strengthen our border security and the next steps in our reforms to the asylum system.

    The House will be aware that when we came into government, we found an asylum and immigration system in chaos: for seven years, small boat gangs had been allowed to embed their criminal trade along the French coast; the asylum backlog was soaring; and illegal working was being ignored. The previous Government had lost control of the system and, as a result, opened many hundreds of asylum hotels across the country, while returns were a third lower than in 2010. Before leaving office, they deliberately cut asylum decision making by 70%, leaving behind a steeply rising backlog. It is little wonder that people across the country lost confidence in the system and demanded to know why they were paying the price of a system that was so out of control.

    However, that does not mean that people rejected the long and proud history of Britain doing our bit to help those fleeing persecution or conflict—including, in the past decade, families from Ukraine, Syria and Hong Kong. It is the British way to do our bit alongside other countries to help those who need sanctuary. However, the system has to be controlled and managed, based on fair and properly enforced rules, not chaos and exploitation driven by criminal smuggler gangs. It is exactly because of our important tradition that substantial reforms are needed now.

    In our first year in government, we have taken immediate action, laying the foundations for more fundamental reform. We restored asylum decision making and then rapidly increased the rate of decisions. Had we continued with the previous Government’s freeze on asylum decisions, thousands more people would have been in hotels and asylum accommodation by now. Instead, we removed 35,000 people with no right to be here, which included a 28% increase in returns of failed asylum seekers and a 14% increase in removals of foreign criminals. We have increased raids and arrests on illegal working by 50%, and we cut the annual hotel bill by almost a billion pounds in the last financial year. We are rolling out digital ID and biometric kits so that immigration enforcement can check on the spot whether someone has a right to work or a right to be in the UK. On channel crossings and organised immigration crime, we are putting in place new powers, new structures and new international agreements to help to dismantle the criminal industry behind the boats.

    I want to update the House on the further steps we are now taking. In August, I signed the new treaty with France allowing us, for the first time, to directly return those who arrive on small boats. The first detentions—of people immediately on arrival in Dover—took place the next day, and we expect the first returns to begin later this month. Applications have been opened for the reciprocal legal route, with the first cases under consideration, subject to strict security checks. We have made it clear that this is a pilot scheme, but the more that we prove the concept at the outset, the better we will be able to develop and grow it.

    The principles the treaty embodies are crucial. No one should be making these dangerous or illegal journeys on small boats; if they do, we want to see them swiftly returned. In return, we believe in doing our bit alongside other countries to help those who have fled persecution through managed and controlled legal programmes.

    This summer we have taken further action to strengthen enforcement against smuggling gangs. France has reviewed its maritime approach to allow for the interception of taxi boats in French waters, and we will continue to work with France to implement the change as soon as possible. In the past year, the National Crime Agency has led 347 disruptions of immigration crime networks—its highest level on record, and a 40% increase in a year.

    Over the summer, we announced a £100 million uplift in funding for border security and up to 300 more personnel in the National Crime Agency focusing on targeting the smuggler gangs. The Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill will give them stronger powers: counter-terrorism powers against smuggler gangs, powers to seize and download the mobile phones of small boat arrivals, and the power to ban sex offenders from the asylum system altogether. If Opposition parties work with us to speed the passage of the Bill through the other place, instead of opposing it, those powers could be in place within months, making our country safer and more secure.

    Let me turn to the major reforms that are needed to fix the broken asylum system that we inherited. Although we have increased decision making and returns, the overall system remains sclerotic, outdated and unfair. As we committed to in the immigration White Paper, we will shortly set out more radical reforms to modernise the asylum system and boost our border security. We will be tackling the pull factors, strengthening enforcement, making sure that people are treated fairly and reforming the way that the European convention on human rights is interpreted here at home. We will be speeding up the system, cutting numbers and ending the use of hotels, and developing controlled and managed routes for genuine refugees.

    At the heart of the reforms will be a complete overhaul of the appeals system—the biggest obstacle to reducing the size of the asylum system and ending hotel use. Tens of thousands of people in asylum accommodation are currently waiting for appeals, and under the current system that figure is to grow, with an average wait time already of 54 weeks. We have already funded thousands of additional sitting days this year, and the border security Bill will introduce a statutory timeframe of 24 weeks.

    However, we need to go further. We will introduce a new independent body to deal with immigration and asylum appeals. It will be fully independent of Government and staffed by professionally trained adjudicators, with safeguards to ensure high standards. It will be able to surge capacity as needed and to accelerate and prioritise cases, alongside new procedures to tackle repeat applications and unnecessary delays. We are also increasing detention and returns capacity, including a 1,000-bed expansion at Campsfield and Haslar, with the first tranche of additional beds coming online within months to support many thousands more enforced removals each year.

    Our reforms will also address the overly complex system for family migration, including changes to the way that article 8 of the ECHR is interpreted. We should be clear that international law is important. It is because other countries know that we abide by international law that we have been able to make new agreements with France, to return people who arrive on small boats, and with Germany, to stop the warehousing of small boats by criminal gangs, and it is why we have been able to explore return hubs partnerships with other European countries. However, we need the interpretation of international law to keep up with the realities and challenges of today’s world.

    There is one area where we need to make more immediate changes. The current rules for family reunion for refugees were designed many years ago to help families separated by war, conflict and persecution, but the way they are used has now changed. Even just before the pandemic, refugees who applied to bring family to the UK did so on average more than one or two years after they had been granted protection, which was long enough for them to get jobs, find housing and be able to provide their family with some support. In Denmark and Switzerland, those who are granted humanitarian protection are currently not able to apply to bring family for at least two years after protection has been granted.

    However, in the UK those family applications now come in, on average, around a month after protection has been granted, often even before a newly granted refugee has left asylum accommodation. As a consequence, refugee families who arrive are far more likely to seek homelessness assistance. Some councils are finding that more than a quarter of their family homelessness applications are linked to refugee family reunion. That is not sustainable. Currently, there are also no conditions on family reunion for refugee sponsors, unlike those in place if the sponsor is a British citizen or long-term UK resident. That is not fair.

    The proportion of migrants who have arrived on small boats and then applied to bring family has also increased sharply in recent years, with signs that smuggler gangs are now able to use the promise of family reunion to promote dangerous journeys to the UK. We continue to believe that families staying together is important, which is why we will seek to prioritise family groups among the applicants to come to Britain under our new deal with France, but reforms are needed. So in our asylum policy statement later this year, we will set out a new system for family migration, including looking at contribution requirements, longer periods before newly granted refugees can apply, and dedicated controlled arrangements for unaccompanied children and those fleeing persecution who have family in the UK.

    We aim to have some of those changes in place for the spring, but in the meantime we do need to address the immediate pressures on local authorities and the risks from criminal gangs using family reunion as a pull factor to encourage more people on to dangerous boats. Therefore, this week we are bringing forward new immigration rules to temporarily suspend new applications under the existing dedicated refugee family reunion route. Until the new framework is introduced, refugees will be covered by the same family migration rules and conditions as everyone else.

    Let me turn next to the action we are taking to ensure that every asylum hotel will be closed for good under this Government, not just by shifting individuals from hotels to other sites but by driving down the numbers in supported accommodation overall, and not in a chaotic way through piecemeal court judgments, but through a controlled, managed and orderly programme: driving down inflow into the asylum system, clearing the appeals backlog, which is crucial, and continuing to increase returns. Within the asylum estate, we are reconfiguring sites, increasing room sharing, tightening the test for accommodation and working at pace to identify alternative, cheaper and more appropriate accommodation with other Departments and with local authorities. We are increasing standards and security and joint public safety co-operation between the police, accommodation providers and the Home Office to ensure that laws and rules are enforced.

    I understand and agree with local councils and communities who want the asylum hotels in their communities closed, because we need to close all asylum hotels—we need to do so for good—but that must be done in a controlled and orderly manner, not through a return to the previous Government’s chaos that led to the opening of hotels in the first place.

    Finally, let me update the House on the continued legal and controlled support that we will provide for those facing conflict and persecution. We will continue to do our bit to support Ukraine, extending the Ukraine permission extension scheme by a further 24 months, with further details to be set out in due course. We are also taking immediate action to rescue children who have been seriously injured in the horrendous onslaught on civilians in Gaza so that they can get the health treatment they need. The Foreign Secretary will update the House shortly on the progress to get those children out.

    I confirm that the Home Office has put in place systems to issue expedited visas with biometric checks conducted prior to arrival for children and their immediate accompanying family members. We have done the same for all the Chevening scholars and are now in the process of doing so for the next group of students from Gaza who have been awarded fully funded scholarships and places at UK universities so that they can start their studies in autumn this year. Later this year, we will set out plans to establish a permanent framework for refugee students to come and study in the UK so that we can help more talented young people fleeing war and persecution to find a better future, alongside capped and managed ways for refugees to work here in the UK.

    The Government are determined to fix every aspect of the broken system we inherited and to restore the confidence of the British people, solving problems, not exploiting them, with a serious and comprehensive plan, not fantasy claims based on sums that do not add up or gimmicks that failed in the past. What we will never do is seek to stir up chaos, division or hate, because that is not who we are as a country, and that is not what Britain stands for.

    This is a practical plan to strengthen our border security, to fix the asylum chaos and to rebuild confidence in an asylum and immigration system that serves our national interests, protects our national security and reflects our national values. When we wave the Union flag, when we wave the St George’s flag, when we sing “God Save the King” and when we celebrate everything that is great about Britain and about our country, we do so with pride because of the values that our flags, our King and our country represent: togetherness, fairness and decency, respect for each other and respect for the rule of law. That is what our country stands for. That is the British way to fix the problems we face. I commend this statement to the House.

  • John Healey – 2025 Speech at the Pacific Future Forum

    John Healey – 2025 Speech at the Pacific Future Forum

    The speech made by John Healey, the Secretary of State for Defence, in Tokyo, Japan on 28 August 2025.

    Ohayo-gozaimasu, good morning, everyone.

    Good morning and welcome aboard HMS Prince of Wales and welcome to the Pacific Future Forum.

    When our flagship here, every one of 65,000 tons of military capability is being put to the service of strengthening our shared security through diplomacy and through deterrence. During an eight-month deployment involving 4,000 of our service personnel, coordinating 12 nations, covering 26,000 nautical miles and visiting 14 countries.

    On behalf of Captain Will Blackett and his crew, we’re delighted to host you here for the Pacific Future Forum, a forum which is increasingly influential, setting out, as you do, a mission, and I quote, dedicated to strengthening the defence, security, technology and trading relationships between like-minded democracies.

    I’m really grateful on your behalf to everyone who has helped put together this two-day forum.

    I’m grateful to them and I’m proud that we’re able to host you here in Tokyo. For the first time on a foreign carrier alongside in Tokyo Bay, and that honour reflects the deepening defence partnership between Japan and the UK.

    Before I turn to the future, I want to just reflect on the past, as we have this month following the commemorations around the world to mark the anniversary of the end of the Second World War.

    Because 80 years on, we honour the memory of some 60,000 souls lost.

    We reflect on the untold suffering of many more.

    And especially, we join in thanks that our two nations have rediscovered friendship.

    The importance of that was reminded to me yesterday when Minister Nakatani and I laid wreaths at the Chidorifaguchi Cemetery.

    It was also very powerful two weeks ago when I attended the UK National Service of Commemoration at the Arboretum.

    I was sat alongside one of the veterans who spoke during that service alongside his great-granddaughter.

    He spoke in remembrance of his fallen by saying this:

    I speak not as a hero, but as someone who witnessed the price of freedom. We must look to the future”, he said.

    We must ensure that the next generation remember our sacrifices so that they can strive for a more peaceful future.

    And in many ways, that is the challenge at the heart of the Pacific Forum’s purpose — that is at the heart of your discussions over these next two days.

    To better protect the generations of tomorrow, we strengthen the alliances of today.

    As Prime Minister Ishiba said at the weekend, aboard this very ship, he said the levels of partnership now between Japan and the UK are unprecedented.

    And when he and I met yesterday, we reflected together on the fact that our two nations are now in a golden age of defence cooperation.

    From future fighter jets to joint exercises, from naval cooperation to cyber resilience.

    Japan is the UK’s closest security ally in Asia, and I know Japan sees Britain as its closest security partner in Europe.

    And just as we set out in June, when we published the Strategic Defence Review, this relationship is vital to regional, it’s vital to global, security.

    Because the security of the Indo-Pacific is simply indivisible from the security of the Euro-Atlantic.

    And this carrier strike route deployment is the operational demonstration of this truth.

    A deployment of firsts.

    For the first time in recent weeks, Japanese destroyers have provided security to Royal Navy ships and RAF aircraft during exercises.

    For the first time in recent days, a British F-35 fighter has landed on the flight deck of a Japanese ship, JS Kaga.

    For the first time in the coming weeks, Japanese F-15s will deploy to Europe, based in the UK.

    But our partnership goes beyond the seas and the skies.

    Our armed forces continue to train together, and the UK is proud to be the first European force to exercise with Japan on Japanese soil.

    And in cyber, our two nations have collaborated in one of the largest international cyber defence exercises outside the US.

    That’s a relationship that we will deepen still further in the months ahead.

    So in every domain, we’re putting in the hard work now so that if ever we are called on to work together in a time of crisis, we know we can. And so do potential adversaries.

    Just as our armed forces operate together, our industries will build together.

    Times change.

    The control of the skies will always belong to those who can adapt first.

    And make no mistake, our adversaries are rapidly designing the capabilities specifically to counter our strengths.

    So the Global Combat Air Programme is how we’ll maintain our advantage.

    A flagship example of a capability partnership — strengthening alliances, strengthening security — both in the Euro-Atlantic and the Indo-Pacific.

    And I hope you see this as a powerful signal of the UK government’s determination to bring partners together from different global regions.

    And I hope you also see it as it is, a programme also of firsts.

    The first time that the UK has worked with a nation outside of Europe on such a programme.

    The first time that Japan has partnered with other nations on such a programme.

    And GCAP grew out of our common assessment of threats, our respect for each other’s technology, and our shared imperative and timeline for introducing the next generation of capability.

    Our shared aim is that GCAP becomes an international standard for how nations pool their resources for greater security and for greater prosperity.

    And you will hear over the next two days more about this, but the government and industry teams from the UK, from Japan and from Italy are making real progress now in realising those ambitions.

    We set up the inter-government organisation led in Reading by a Japanese CEO, underpinned by treaties passed in all three of our parliaments.

    Edgewing, our joint industrial venture, has now stood up — bringing the aerospace leaders from all three nations together in a single joint company venture.

    Our task as three ministers now by the end of the year is to ensure that we can agree the first GCAP international contract — another important step in driving the delivery of the design and development phase and allowing them to get towards manufacturing.

    Whilst building a supersonic stealth fighter is by nature a long-term project, economic benefits are already being felt in all three nations.

    So in the UK, we’ve invested a further billion pounds this year in our future combat programme. It already employs four and a half thousand people, and we expect GCAP to create thousands of new jobs in all three nations.

    So whilst it’s first and foremost about ensuring our three nations can police the skies over the Indo-Pacific and the Euro-Atlantic — to ensure they keep our people safe for a generation to come — one of the greatest strengths that many of you in this room know better than anyone else, one of the greatest strengths of the defence sector, is often the instruments that we design to provide a combat or battlefield advantage become the foundation for wider progress in society.

    And so GCAP will also provide huge potential opportunities for our finest minds to work at the forefront of autonomy, space, quantum technology — potential and possibilities not just for security, but for our societies as well.

    And I want you to see our total UK commitment to developing GCAP, our continued effort to operate ever closer with Japan’s Self-Defence Force, and I want you to see the deployment of our carrier strike group to the Indo-Pacific as demonstrating what we declared as a government, we set out in the strategic view, of a policy that is NATO first, but not NATO only.

    Because as we see the threats, more serious, less predictable, than at any time since the Cold War — Ukraine demonstrates what Jens Stoltenberg argued years ago:

    What happens in the Indo-Pacific, he said, matters in the Euro-Atlantic.

    And what happens in the Euro-Atlantic matters in the Indo-Pacific.

    And right now in Ukraine, our adversaries are proving just that — autocratic states working more closely together.

    So Russia, in the hope of breaking the will of the sovereign Ukrainian people, has called on North Korea for troops, Iran for drones, and China for technology, equipment, and weapons components.

    Here, 8,000 kilometres from Kyiv, the Japanese people understand this, and have stood as true friends from the start to Ukraine.

    We’re grateful, and we pay tribute to that support.

    They’ve been providing assistance alongside NATO.

    They’ve been supporting the coalition of the willing.

    So when we say “NATO first, but not NATO only,” this is more than a slogan.

    It reflects the growing threats that we face today — threats that don’t respect regions or national borders: cyber attacks, disinformation, attacks on democracy, hostile action in space.

    And for the UK, some of our closest, most like-minded partners in countering these threats are to be found in the Indo-Pacific — just as some of our most exciting technological partnerships are forged here too.

    And it is only through working together that we will strengthen regional security, that we will reinforce a lasting stability— the stability on which our economic growth, our social resilience, and the future of our countries depend.

    For us, our allies are our strategic strength.

    And so in a more dangerous world, in a new era of threats, we’re deepening our defence cooperation with good partners like Japan — bilaterally, industrially, and through NATO.

    And just as the threats we face are real, to make deterrence real, we must work more closely together.

    That imperative is right at the heart of the purpose of the Pacific Future Forum.

    So in summary, that is why the presence of the Prince of Wales here in Tokyo is not just symbolic — it’s strategic.

    It’s building on the UK’s partnerships and commitments across the region.

    Our naval presence provided by HMS Tamar and HMS Spey — helping to uphold freedom of navigation, enforcing sanctions, providing humanitarian assistance.

    Our military presence in Singapore, Brunei.

    Our joint exercises with Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore — as part of the historic Five Power Defence Arrangements.

    And our contribution to ASEANs expert working groups in the dialogue partnership.

    Each deployment, each exercise, each relationship, each industrial or technological collaboration strengthens stability, reinforces security.

    And as our two nations prove — when we double down, when we invest in those partnerships — those partnerships are the source of our ultimate strength.

    So thank you once again to Minister Nakatani, who will speak to the forum later today.

    Thank you to everyone in Japan who has made this visit possible.

    Thank you to everyone who contributes to our defence partnership.

    Our relationship with Japan is one that we hold dear.

    And in the words of His Majesty, the Emperor:

    We are friends like no other.

    And I look forward to strengthening that partnership, that friendship, in the years ahead.
    Thank you.

  • Keir Starmer – 2025 Remarks at VJ Day 80 Reception

    Keir Starmer – 2025 Remarks at VJ Day 80 Reception

    The remarks made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, at 10 Downing Street on 14 August 2025.

    I know so many people here in the garden and across the country will have their own memories of family and loved ones.

    And it is a real privilege for me to welcome you to Downing Street and into this garden.

    This is the centre of government, this is where I work, it’s where I live and it is a privilege to have you here – and right that you are here…

    Because this is a government of service, and therefore it is a government at your service.

    And so many of you have served and got family members who served so it is really fitting that you’re here and its more than juts a kind invitation for the afternoon.

    It’s a reflection I hope of how important it is to us that we’re able to have you here.

    So when I say it is a privilege, it really is my privilege to have you here…

    And I know that people have come from far and wide to be in the garden this afternoon

    To remember 80 years since our victory in the World War II.

    And to take the opportunity, and it is the opportunity, to pay our respects to the many who fought…

    Who were captured…

    And of course who made the ultimate sacrifice in the Far East.

    And we do pay our respects here this afternoon as we do so often.

    It’s a reminder that in the Cabinet Room just a few yards from us that the new Prime Minister then, as it was, Clement Attlee, just been elected into office at the end of the Second World War received the news of Japan’s surrender.

    And it was in there that that news was broken and the nation begun to understand that now it really was the end of World War II.

    And as you can imagine people took to the streets, we have spoken to many people who took to the streets on those days and that feeling that they had of freedom and peace at last…

    But I think alongside that feeling of joy and victory, relief of peace, was really a shared determination, a shared moment across the nation that victory also had to be a turning point for our country.

    Not just for a world that was crying out for peace.

    But for a country that owed a huge debt…

    to those people that had fought for a better future.

    Those who had made huge sacrifices….

    So we have the freedoms and the life we enjoy today.

    And when we say we pay respects, that’s what we mean by that, because we are exercising those freedoms every day, because of what they did and the sacrifices that they made.

    And that in a way is the lesson we carry with us today, it is the lesson that we must hold up every day.

    Our duty to honour that sacrifice…

    With every new generation.

    That’s what it means when we say we will ‘never forget’.  Because it doesn’t juts mean we will never forget a particular moment, the end, the final end, of World War II, but we must never forget what that gave us…

    What that gave our country, what that gave the world in terms of the freedoms and the values that we fight for.

    And of course those values are still contested here.

    I sat on this terrace this very morning with President Zelenskyy, who is fighting for the same values as we were fighting for.

    And so when we say never forget, we must pass on the stories of those who have gone before us.

    Those incredible stories and the stories that many others have shared.

    I’ve seen some of the extracts from the letters that were sent, which were extraordinary, exquisite memories and experiences and vignettes into life as it was then.

    Stories of camaraderie, of courage, real courage…

    From fighting in jungles and blistering heat…

    To the immense suffering of prisoners of war on the Burma railway and elsewhere – and it was immense suffering as many of you will know.

    But we also remind ourselves of what that was fighting for.

    A peace that is precious, that is fragile…

    As I say, that we can see on our own continent today.

    And the possibility of a better future for the next generation.

    That is what the Attlee government took as its mission.

    Creating an NHS, building homes fit for heroes, the welfare state. They were all good, important things for a government to do. But they were done with a sense of mission, that we had to repay the debt that we owed to those who had made such a contribution in the Second World War.

    By building a new Britain that reflected the dignity of its people.

    And that is what my government is determined to do today.

    And that’s why I stood outside Downing Street the day after the election last year and said we wild be a government service – that same sense that we are here to serve the country, to create a better country.

    A part of that of course is working with our allies to secure peace abroad…

    It is a continual project, it’s not a project that ended 80 years ago by any stretch of the imagination.

    To rebuild Britain once more so it’s a country we can be proud of. That is capable of playing its full part on the world stage to deescalate tensions and bring about just and lasting peace in areas including in our own continent.

    A country worthy of the soldiers that marched under our flag…

    And showed the world that Britain is – and will always be…

    a beacon of peace…

    And hope…

    in a dangerous world.

    So thank you all – for your service.

    Thank you for being here.

    Thank you for sharing your experiences and keeping that story alive.

    And I really hope you have a wonderful afternoon.

  • David Lammy – 2025 Statement on the Situation in El Fasher, Sudan

    David Lammy – 2025 Statement on the Situation in El Fasher, Sudan

    The statement made by David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, on 13 August 2025.

    Shocking reports are emerging of the latest assault by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in and around El Fasher, North Darfur. In Abu Shouk camp for internally displaced persons (IDP), attacks earlier this week killed at least 40 defenceless civilians who had already fled violence in El Fasher.

    As fighting intensifies, exit routes from El Fasher remain blocked, trapping hundreds of thousands who now face famine, widespread reports of atrocities, and the rapid spread of disease, including cholera. Those who managed to flee to camps like Abu Shouk were already cut off from aid — and are now under attack.

    This is not an isolated incident. It is part of a pattern of deliberate violence and brutality against civilians. The warring parties have a responsibility to end this needless suffering. They must urgently comply with their clear obligations under international humanitarian law and the commitments made in Jeddah: protect civilians and allow and facilitate unimpeded humanitarian access.

    Last month, the ICC Office of the Prosecutor confirmed that there are reasonable grounds to believe war crimes and crimes against humanity have been – and continue to be – committed in Darfur. Deliberate attacks on civilians are a clear violation of international law. The perpetrators must be held accountable.

    Today, together with our African partners & Guyana, we led a UN Security Council statement calling for immediate humanitarian access & respect for international law. The UK will continue to use all tools at our disposal to get aid to those who need it the most.

    I urge the RSF, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), and allied armed groups to agree to the UN Secretary-General’s call for a humanitarian pause in and around El Fasher and urgently put in place the conditions that will allow immediate access. Only this will allow the delivery of food, water, medicine, and other life-saving supplies to those facing starvation.

    In line with UN Security Council Resolution 2736, the RSF must end its siege of El Fasher and cease attacks on civilians, and the SAF and allied Joint Forces must also allow and facilitate a rapid and unimpeded passage for humanitarian workers and civilians, so that aid can reach those most in need.