Air India Plane Crash
Debate between Clive Efford and Hamish Falconer(2 weeks, 1 day ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Falconer
I confirm that we will provide British families with all the support they require during this horrific incident.
Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)
This is truly a terrible tragedy. As an elected representative in Greenwich where we have a large Gujarat community, over 40 years, both as a councillor and an MP, I have got to know many people from the community, particularly those who are members of the South East Gujarati Association. Like all of us, they will be grieving today after this terrible tragedy. In his statement the Minister mentioned that family liaison officers have been appointed. What resources do they have? They must be able to get information to families promptly, and people may need further assistance, such as with travel. Do they have access to those sorts of resources?
Mr Falconer
My hon. Friend asks an important question. Family liaison officers, often known as FLOs, support families in the UK and are part of UK policing. They are always able to talk to my officials—the consular officials who take care of British nationals overseas—and we always try to ensure that the relationship between consular officials and FLOs works as smoothly as possible, so that families are provided with the full support of the UK. If families in the UK or overseas have any questions about how that operates, I am happy to talk to my colleagues about that.
Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories
Debate between Clive Efford and Hamish Falconer(3 weeks, 6 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Falconer
The right hon. and learned Member makes a very powerful point. One reason that the traditional positions of UK Government and many other Governments across the world has been that the recognition of a Palestinian state should come at the end or during a two-state solution process was the hope that we would move towards a two-state solution. Many minds have been changed, like the right hon. and learned Gentleman’s, because of the rhetoric of the Israeli Government—the clear statements by so many that they are no longer committed to a two-state solution. We see in the press many representatives of the Israeli Government criticising others for considering their position in relation to a Palestinian state. Exactly as the right hon. and learned Member says, it is the action of this Israeli Government that has made so many, including ourselves, review their position on these matters.
Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)
The time has come for us to stop arming Israel in any way whatsoever. This collaborative pool of items that are gathered under the auspices of NATO seems to be a route by which Israel can be supplied. Is it not possible for us to withdraw the right for anything we supply to that collaborative pool to be passed on to Israel, or even to influence our partners in that pool to stop providing any form of weaponry to Israel via that route?
Mr Falconer
Let me first address my hon. Friend’s question about arms more broadly, and then turn to the F-35s. We have taken steps to ensure that weapons directly for use in Gaza have been suspended. As my hon. Friend has outlined, there is a provision in the F-35 programme for a global spares pool, the operation of which we do not control. I understand the argument sometimes made in this House that in fact we could control the final destination of those parts, but that is a point that we refute—it is being debated in the courts, and a judgment is forthcoming on the question of whether or not the final destination of F-35 parts could indeed be determined. I am afraid that I have nothing further to add on that point.
However, I want to be clear to the House—as my right hon. Friend the Minister for Trade Policy and Economic Security was on Monday evening—that the arms suspensions that we have introduced are far-reaching. Some reports have suggested that we have not taken far-reaching action, and that significant arms are still reaching the Israel Defence Forces, but that is simply factually not true. The sale of items that are controlled by the arms licensing criteria continues, as we still judge that many military-grade items—for example, body armour for non-governmental organisations—are appropriate to be traded with Israel, because they will go to NGOs that are going in.
It is also true that we are trading components that will end up in use outside of Israel, in the arsenal of NATO allies. For example, of the £127.5 million of export licences that have been approved subsequent to our decision, £120 million of them were for components for a NATO ally, not for Israel. There is considerable confusion about that point, so I wanted to take the opportunity to clarify it.
Oral Answers to Questions
Debate between Clive Efford and Hamish Falconer(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Falconer
As I think the House knows, I am familiar with the impediments to getting aid into Gaza—I went to the Gaza-Egypt border to see the restrictions for myself. We have made these points in public and in private, and we will continue to do so. We are talking to our Jordanian partners and others—many in the region understandably have real concerns about the lack of aid getting in. Although we are considering, with Jordan and others, what the alternatives may be, I must be plain with the House: there is no alternative to a land route if aid is to get in at the scale that is required, so we must be clear with the Israeli Government and all partners in the region that opening those crossings is critical.
Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)
Mr Lazzarini has said that children in Gaza are more likely to die of starvation than of an act of violence. What does my hon. Friend expect from this afternoon’s session at the UN? What specifically will be asked for that would move the situation on? Israel cannot be allowed to continue using food as a weapon of war.
Mr Falconer
I think I was clear about the Government’s expectations in my previous answer. Those expectations are grounded in Israel’s international legal obligations. Ultimately, this is a week of diplomacy: the President of the United States will be in the region, and we will raise these issues in the Security Council. I hope that diplomacy will be able to make progress towards a ceasefire and the restoration of aid.