Sudan: Protection of Civilians

Jim Shannon Excerpts
Thursday 30th October 2025

(1 day, 10 hours ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.

Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Stephen Doughty Portrait Stephen Doughty
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I completely associate myself with my hon. Friend’s comments and expectations. I assure her that this issue remains at the heart not only of our work on holding individuals responsible and on bringing this conflict to an end, but also of the specific support we are providing through our programming for survivors of sexual and gender-based violence. Some of the reports we have been receiving in recent days are horrific. These incidents must end.

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

I thank the Minister very much for his well-chosen words. I thank the right hon. Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) for securing this urgent question. Other MPs and I have long been highlighting the atrocities taking place in Sudan, including stomach-churning terrorist attacks, and rapes and murders taking place daily. It grieves me greatly, and I know it grieves this House greatly. I underline the issue for Christians in particular, who are particularly targeted in Sudan. The latest attack is yet another where the detail makes me feel sick to my stomach, yet it is simply an extension of the evil that the world has turned a blind eye to thus far. I know the Minister is honest, so what more will the Government do to deliver the right help and to step up and step in for the people facing that devastation in Sudan?

Stephen Doughty Portrait Stephen Doughty
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Member rightly raises the many atrocities that have taken place in Sudan on the basis of people’s religion, ethnic grouping and other minority status. I share his absolute revulsion at some of the recent allegations. He can be assured that, whether it is through our work at the United Nations later today, our work in the programming that we provide or our support for holding the perpetrators to account, this issue will remain at the top of our agenda.

Gaza and Hamas

Jim Shannon Excerpts
Wednesday 29th October 2025

(2 days, 10 hours ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.

Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Falconer
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I hope the hon. Member will forgive me, but I do not have the numbers precisely to hand. I did an extensive hearing in front of the Foreign Affairs Committee in which we went through the numbers in some detail, but let me focus on the key point. We have suspended all arms that could be used in this way; we are not selling bombs or bullets that could be used in Gaza or the west bank. The munitions that he and so many others in this country saw exploding last night on their television screens were not British.

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

I thank the Minister very much for his answers, his tone and his well-chosen words; we appreciate them. The moment that there were reports of shots fired at Israeli soldiers in Rafah and of an IDF soldier being murdered, my heart sank—as the hearts of many others probably did—because I knew that the tenuous peace had been broken by Hamas. Does the Minister accept that retaliation is inevitable? What role can the Government play, along with our allies, to rebuild the fragile peace process and disarm Hamas, remove their weapons and destroy them? Real and lasting peace can then actually happen.

Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Falconer
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the hon. Member for his important question and his as ever courteous tone. The work is important. The threats to the ceasefire are many and varied, and we will continue to work with our partners in exactly the way that he describes.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jim Shannon Excerpts
Tuesday 28th October 2025

(3 days, 10 hours ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Yvette Cooper Portrait Yvette Cooper
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Member is right to highlight water as a crucial humanitarian aid and support. I have spoken to Tom Fletcher, who is co-ordinating much of the UN support, and to the Egyptian and Israeli Foreign Ministers about the importance of ensuring that the crossings are open so that water can be provided and critical infrastructure rebuilt. That will require financing, and my hon. Friend the Middle East Minister has already been involved in looking at ways in which we can finance reconstruction for the long term.

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

I thank the Secretary of State very much for her responses. The peace plan can succeed only if Hamas are not part of it. Hamas need to return the dead hostages to the families, and they need to be disarmed. We also need to ensure that they are not carrying out summary executions of fellow Gazans, as they are currently doing. If we are going to have a peace plan that lasts, Hamas need to be removed from the situation—we can then have peace.

Yvette Cooper Portrait Yvette Cooper
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Member will know that I have always described Hamas as a barbaric terrorist organisation, and that remains the case. Crucially, we have seen the Arab League condemn and reject Hamas, and join us and other countries from across the world in being clear that Hamas can play no role in the future governance of Gaza or of Palestine. The UK has particularly been offering support on the decommissioning of weapons and the disarming of Hamas—a crucial part of the peace process—so that Palestinians and Israelis can live in peace and security.

Black History Month

Jim Shannon Excerpts
Thursday 23rd October 2025

(1 week, 1 day ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Seema Malhotra Portrait The Minister for Equalities (Seema Malhotra)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I beg to move,

That this House has considered Black History Month.

I am honoured to open this debate on Black History Month, which, for the second year running, is being held in Government time. It is a chance to honour those who came before us, to celebrate their lives and their courage, and to recognise the huge contribution that our black communities make in Britain today.

In her powerful opening speech in last year’s debate, my hon. Friend the Member for Erith and Thamesmead (Ms Oppong-Asare) made the very clear argument that black history is British history. She said:

“the lives of black Britons are the building blocks of our nation, from the Roman occupation to the Windrush generation; because history is never static, but a story constantly being told and re-told over again; and because the voices of black Britons have so often been marginalised and dismissed, ignored and overlooked.”—[Official Report, 24 October 2024; Vol. 755, c. 446.]

She was right: generation after generation, black Britons have been present on the frontline of efforts to break down barriers, even when set against persistent and sometimes hostile opposition.

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
- Hansard - -

I commend the Minister and the Government for bringing us this debate. What the Minister said applies to my constituency of Strangford. People from Nigeria, Kenya, Uganda, Egypt, Pakistan and India contribute to the work-life and economy of Strangford, as well its culture, religion and history. I think we all recognise their contribution, and the Minister is making that point in an absolutely excellent way.

Seema Malhotra Portrait Seema Malhotra
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his comments. He describes powerfully the contribution to his community and our country of those from all backgrounds and nations.

Korean War: 75th Commemoration

Jim Shannon Excerpts
Wednesday 22nd October 2025

(1 week, 2 days ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.

Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
- Hansard - -

It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Twigg. I commend the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) for securing this debate. I always come along to support him because his heart is always in the subject matter. Today he illustrated that incredibly well.

Seventy-five years ago, British and Commonwealth servicemen and women joined a United Nations coalition to defend the Korean peninsula from aggression. It was one of the bloodiest conflicts of the 20th century; it is estimated to have claimed about 3 million lives, most of them civilians. The scars of that division remain visible to this day. More than 1,000 British servicemen were killed, and several thousand more were wounded or taken prisoner. They fought with extraordinary bravery in the harshest of conditions, from the battle of the Imjin river to the defence of Seoul. Their courage stands as a lasting testament to our nation’s commitment to freedom and peace in this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

I am ever mindful of my constituent Colonel Robin Charley. He was born in 1924 and died in 2019 aged 95. He was a magnificent soldier who showed incredible courage and bravery. I remember his medal, because it always intrigued me—the Queen’s Korea medal—and he wore it with pride. I was not quite sure what it was; I asked him one day and he told me some of the stories of Korea and what had happened. He has passed away now, but his daughter, Catherine Champion, is a vice lord lieutenant of County Down. He passed on to his children that commitment to duty and doing one’s best; he did that wonderfully well.

I am also reminded of another gentleman who has passed away: Mr Milligan from Loughries outside Newtownards, who also lived to a ripe old age. He fought in that war and carried the scars of Korea each and every day.

The war ended not with peace, but with an armistice—a fragile ceasefire that still divides one people into two nations. The south rebuilt and flourished as a democracy; the north closed itself off inwardly under totalitarian rule. What did the Korean war leave us with for Christians and people of faith? Seventy-five years on, we honour the legacy best by standing for those who are still denied the freedoms for which our soldiers fought all those years ago.

I am grateful to the all-party parliamentary group on North Korea—we have representatives here today—for its continued commitment

“to promote and support human rights, including religious freedom, humanitarian needs, democracy and…international security”.

This debate is very much about the international security that people fought for 75 years ago and fight for today. As the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green said, that fight has not finished.

I am also grateful to the North Korean exile community for the immense courage that it takes to share their stories. Ten years ago, the United Nations Commission of Inquiry described the “gravity, scale and nature” of the Kim regime’s crimes as having no

“parallel in the contemporary world.”

A decade later, little has changed. There is no parallel in the contemporary world. North Korea is top of the tree when it comes to persecution, denying human rights and murdering its own people.

As chair of the all-party parliamentary group for international freedom of religion or belief, I care deeply about promoting freedom in North Korea and around the globe. Religious freedom is effectively non-existent in North Korea. According to non-governmental organisation and United Nations estimates, between 50,000 and 70,000 Christians are believed to be detained in political camps solely because of their faith—some for owning a Bible, others for praying in secret. Some of us pray every day and carry our Bible. In North Korea, people cannot do that, because the punishment is death.

Broader estimates suggest there might be 400,000 underground Christians across the country, worshipping quietly and at constant risk of discovery. These are not just statistics; these are people. Defectors have testified that people have been beaten, starved and executed simply for believing in God. One mother was reportedly forced to watch her sons shot for possessing Christian literature. Such cruelty is part of a deliberate campaign to eradicate faith and enforce absolute devotion to the ruling family.

Those who try to flee face grave danger. There are credible reports of a shoot-to-kill policy at the border. Those who reach China are often forcibly repatriated, as others have said, in violation of international law and the principle of non-refoulement. Human Rights Watch and other organisations report that hundreds of North Koreans have been returned from China in recent years to face imprisonment and torture, especially if they are suspected of contact with Christians or missionaries. How wrong it seems to be, to North Korea’s regime, to be a Christian, to have a faith, and to have independent thought.

One voice that brings that horror into focus is that of Jinhye Jo, a North Korean defector who has spoken with remarkable courage. Fleeing to China with her mother and sister, she found God in a small countryside church—a glimmer of grace amid fear. For that faith, she was forcibly repatriated four times, and was each time beaten and interrogated by the Bowibu, the secret police, who demanded to know whether she had attended church or had social engagements with Christians. That courageous lady said this:

“All these methods of severe and cruel punishment were to try to find out…whether we had attended church or come into contact with Christians”.

She went on to say:

“God saved me so that I would be able to tell the world the plight of the North Korean people’s unfair suffering and the worst modern-day evil that is going on right now.”

Jinhye Jo’s testimony is not only a cry of pain, but a call to conscience. Today, we stand in solidarity with our brothers and sisters facing persecution in North Korea. As Jeremiah 22:3 reminds us, we must do what is just and right always, and rescue the oppressed from the power of the oppressor. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland must continue to press for justice and accountability for crimes against humanity, urge China to end forced repatriations and support those documenting evidence for future prosecutions. A day of reckoning will come, and we want to ensure that that day is in this world, although of course they will get their day of reckoning in the next.

Seventy-five years after our forebears fought for the freedom of Korea, let their courage inspire us to defend freedom again, until the day comes when every person in North Korea can live in peace, dignity and hope.

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

Thank you for allowing me to speak on this issue once again, Ms Ghani. I will prefix my comments with this. It is always good to see the Ministers—the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, the hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty) and the Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry, the hon. Member for Plymouth Sutton and Devonport (Luke Pollard)—in their place. They are both honourable men whose friendship I value. Being ever respectful, and with great respect to both hon. Gentlemen, I wish to make some comments that will be very contrary to what they have put forward today.

It will be no surprise that I rise at the last hour and as the last Back-Bench speaker—that is often the case, but none the less it is always a pleasure to make a contribution —to ask the Government again to reconsider their decision and ask the Committee to oppose the Bill, even though I know that the numbers game does not stack up.

As we all know, the treaty provides for Mauritius to exercise full sovereignty over the Chagos archipelago, with the UK exercising rights on Diego Garcia during an initial 99-year period. Over those 99 years, the UK will pay Mauritius a total of around £3.4 billion in 2025-26 prices, and that will probably rise. At a time when the Government are taxing farmers, taxing widows’ pensions and taxing the middle class into oblivion, handing over £3.4 billion with a benefit that is not tangible is unacceptable. Our constituents will be worse off in the next financial year. Indeed, a typical British family are as much as £15,000 a year poorer than they were five years ago, according to recent Telegraph Money analysis. Why, then, have we entered into this agreement, which may fluctuate and cost substantially more than the figure that has been predicted?

I want to make it clear that I believe this treaty should be renegotiated from beginning to end, but if the Bill is to go ahead, it is essential that any increases in payments should come through this House, and that whatever Government are in place at that time should present that. I therefore support new clause 1, which would give certainty and security that increases would not take place without the approval of this House.

Turning to new clauses 2, 5 and 7, I have long stated that there are now substantial risks to our military bases, and that has been reiterated by every person bar one in the Committee today. I am anxious to understand our legal standing on this. I believe it is right and proper for the Committee to understand the nature of how renting from Mauritius will give us the safety and security needed to ensure that those stationed on the base, or relying on support from the base in that area, will not feel vulnerable or exposed. I believe that this deal does expose us, and that we need to be very much aware of our standing and take the necessary steps. That begins with having full knowledge and not simply empty assurances. The recent debacle with the Chinese spies decisions has shown that openness, transparency and accountability are needed even more tonight than they have been in the other statements and urgent questions today. New clause 2 would enforce that as a minimum.

New clause 9 is similar to new clause 8, tabled by the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister) and my right hon. Friend the Member for East Antrim (Sammy Wilson). I support new clause 9, given its similarity to the new clause brought forward by my Northern Ireland colleagues, who are intimately aware of how issues on the ground can be vastly different from those that are reported. This addition to ensure that a report is made on the compliance of the treaty and the Act with the UN General Assembly resolutions on decolonisation is vital and, I believe, underlines the words of support that have been given to those in the area who are fearful of the removal of British influence and support and fearful of the Mauritian ideals, which were flagged by our American allies in their human rights report in 2023.

As the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on international freedom of religion or belief, I know that the two issues of human rights and persecution are married together as one, because when we highlight the issue of human rights, we also highlight the issue of persecution of religious beliefs, and vice versa. I really have to express some concerns over human rights in this context. I understand that the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, the hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth will reply to the debate. Although I believe he understands and believes in these issues as strongly as I do, I still have great concerns about human rights. It is essential that we do not simply hand over control and abandon not just the military base but all in the region who have relied on our support and friendship over the years.

Unfortunately, this has been a bad treaty from beginning to end. Our Chagossian citizens remain unhappy, our armed forces remain unhappy and the families who are footing the bill are unhappy. I believe that the Government have made the wrong decision on this. The recent Chinese debacle has heightened the need to continue to have boots on the ground and eyes wide open against those who would seek to thwart British interests and the interests of freedom and democracy worldwide. We have recently seen the result of appeasement when the Israeli Deputy Prime Minister highlighted the difficulties brought about by this Government’s decision to recognise terrorism and a Palestinian state with no borders, no working non-terrorist Government and no social care system. The handing over of Chagos and renting it back will prove to be a costly and dangerous exercise in capitulation, and even at this very late stage I urge the Government to think again and, at the very least, accept additional protection for the sake of all our collective security.

Stephen Doughty Portrait Stephen Doughty
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank all hon. and right hon. Members for their contributions. I will attempt to respond to the specifics of the amendments and new clauses in due course, but I want to come back to some of the fundamental points that have been raised during the debate first, and I also want to respond to some of the specific questions that were raised.

With the exception of some genuine questions in relation to the Chagossians, the MPA and the environmental protections, and the implementation of this treaty, it was a shame to see the rehash of the same arguments that were made on Second Reading. There were some outrageous and nonsensical arguments and claims, particularly relating to the costs and to other matters, which I will come to.

I was shocked by some of the anti-American, conspiracy-fuelled nonsense that we heard at various points during the debate. The base is critical to the United Kingdom, the United States, our allies and our national security, and the Bill and the treaty protect the functioning of that base. It does not surrender it; it secures it into the future. This is a Government who inherited a mess from the former Ministers on the Opposition Benches. We are getting stuff done. We are a patriotic Government; our first duty is to protect the national security of this country, and that is why we have got this deal done. It is why it is backed by the United States. It is why it is backed by our Five Eyes partners. It is absolutely crucial to protect the British people and our allies.

We have been very transparent about the reasons for it, and they are the exact opposite of what has been suggested. I come back, as I always have done, to the fundamental question: if there were not a problem and a risk to the operations of this crucial base, why did the previous Government start the negotiations, why did they continue them through 11 rounds of negotiations, and why did they continue them right up until the general election? Those are the facts.

Ukraine

Jim Shannon Excerpts
Wednesday 15th October 2025

(2 weeks, 2 days ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Yvette Cooper Portrait Yvette Cooper
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I welcome my hon. Friend’s support for unlocking Russian sovereign assets. The Chancellor is raising that issue in Washington with international partners as I speak.

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

I welcome the right hon. Lady to her place. The experience that she brings from her previous role will benefit us all and I thank her for her answers. Putin will have watched the Israel-Gaza problem carefully, and he will know that all eyes are turning to Russia to end the unnecessary conflict in Ukraine. What further steps can we take, in co-operation with our American allies, to seize this opportunity to end bloodshed and to restore education and hope for Ukrainian children, thereby ensuring that Putin realises that he has no option other than the cessation of Russian aggression?

Yvette Cooper Portrait Yvette Cooper
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the hon. Member for his kind words. I agree with him that there must be no other option for Putin than to cease aggression and that this is ultimately about hope for Ukrainian children.

COP30: Food System Transformation

Jim Shannon Excerpts
Tuesday 14th October 2025

(2 weeks, 3 days ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.

Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
- Hansard - -

I thank and commend the hon. Member for South Cambridgeshire (Pippa Heylings) for setting out the debate so very well. This year’s COP30 will highlight the role of sustainable food systems in addressing environmental prosperity and climate change. That is something to which each nation can contribute, especially within the United Kingdom, so it is very important that all our nations pave the way.

I understand the importance of this year’s conference of the parties being held in Brazil, but there is a role for us to play on our own farms and in the rural countryside that we represent. I will refer to family farms in Northern Ireland, because they are crucial to Northern Ireland’s agriculture sector, managing approximately all of our region’s land area. I am aware of the work of the farmers in my constituency, whose efforts are second to none. In Northern Ireland, we have the soil nutrient health scheme, a comprehensive soil-testing initiative launched by the Department of Agriculture with a £37 million investment. It aims to enhance the sustainability and efficiency of farming practices across Northern Ireland.

Food waste cannot be ignored. There is a role not just for farmers, but for every one of us. Some 9.5 million tonnes of food is wasted in the UK: on average, 50% is wasted in each household. Everyone here discards about 22% of their weekly food purchases. Food expiration dates and best-before dates have led to confusion around food; evidence suggests that applying labels consistently could reduce food waste. There are roles that we can play here to help those in Brazil and elsewhere across the world.

I look forward to hearing the outcomes of COP30. I hope that the Minister will come to the House to update us. Collectively, across the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, we can play an important role and be real role models to others, especially in our food production and our food security.

International Day of Democracy

Jim Shannon Excerpts
Tuesday 16th September 2025

(1 month, 2 weeks ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.

Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
- Hansard - -

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir John. I commend the hon. Member for Cities of London and Westminster (Rachel Blake) for securing this debate. It is an absolute pleasure to speak in this debate, as the importance of democracy lies in the protection of rights, the accountability of power and, indeed, public participation. That is what gives each and every individual of this great nation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and beyond, a right to civil liberty. I am honoured to speak in support of that.

I welcome the Minister to his new role as the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs. He is probably glad that he is no longer in charge of the Whip. He hopefully has an easier job. I look forward to his contribution. He always has a calmness, and in this debate we will see how calm he can be when it comes to answering all the questions. I wish him well.

The hon. Member for Cities of London and Westminster referred to Jimmy Lai, and I wholeheartedly agree with what she said. He is deteriorating, health-wise, in a Hong Kong prison on trumped-up charges made by the Chinese Communist party. It is important that we, in this House and elsewhere, take a stand.

For decades, democracy has been used across Great Britain and Northern Ireland to ensure free and fair elections. With our universal suffrage for all citizens aged 18 and over, the separation of powers and the rule of law that all must follow, democracy in the United Kingdom has delivered representation and accountability, but it must always remain resilient, fair and inclusive. Democracy must be the cornerstone of any country, as we have seen in Northern Ireland from the era of the troubles until now, albeit there is still much work to be done.

This debate is timely. I, as an elected representative, would not feel right participating in it without mentioning the attack on democracy and the freedom of expression that we all witnessed in Utah last week in the murder of Charlie Kirk. It hit all too close to home, following the murder of our own David Amess and Jo Cox, and many others.

Free speech—the right to speak freely—is fundamental to any democracy, or any state with democratic principles, as this mother of Parliaments very much demonstrates. Back home in Northern Ireland, we know all too well the damage that political violence can do. It is upsetting and shocking to witness further instances of it in other parts of the world. Each Member who represents Northern Ireland, and indeed those who do not, will understand the 30 years of conflict that we had, to which many of us, and our families, were subject directly.

Charlie Kirk spoke boldly for what he believed. He used his voice to challenge the damaging culture of the day and to shape the future of America. Charlie highlighted how one person’s words can move hearts, spark debate and leave a mark on history. On that gazebo last weekend was written, “Prove me wrong”. He was open to debate and to exchanging views. At the same time, he was open to being able to persuade others of what he was trying to say.

Gregory Campbell Portrait Mr Gregory Campbell
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The murder of Charlie Kirk shows the most concerning aspect of democracy in the United States, but almost as concerning was the aftermath, when a number of people sought to justify his murder, and to explain it and define it, by quoting—sometimes in context, sometimes out of context—something he is alleged to have said. We need to be careful in the aftermath of violent acts.

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon
- Hansard - -

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Nothing grieved me as much, and probably grieved others in this House and further afield, as those awful remarks that were almost rejoicing in Charlie Kirk’s murder. I find it almost inconceivable to comprehend that, especially when a wife and children, and many others, are grieving.

It cannot be overestimated how loved and well respected Charlie was, especially among the young people of this generation. I have some seven staff who work with me, and there are four young ones among them. Those four are in their 20s, and they were genuinely devastated by the news—they said they felt grief and loss. That tells me that the impact of the murder of Charlie Kirk went far beyond America and across this great nation as well. The shadow spokesperson, the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell), has tabled an early-day motion on the murder, and I have tabled one as well.

Those in my constituency from older age groups have also outlined how they are equally as shocked and saddened. Charlie spread the word of God, the word of family, faith and freedom, and the importance of conservative politics today. I do not care what someone’s political aspirations or religious views are—they are not important. The fact is that no individual on this Earth deserves to have their life ripped away from them.

Lizzi Collinge Portrait Lizzi Collinge
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right that the murder of Charlie Kirk was an appalling act. No one should ever feel threatened by violence; no one should ever be killed for their beliefs or their actions. However much we disagree with the horrendous nature of his death, does the hon. Gentleman agree that some of the statements made by Charlie Kirk in life meant that other people felt that their freedom was being threatened, and that they were not safe to speak out?

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon
- Hansard - -

I agree that we have the right to freedom of speech, and it is very important to have that. Charlie Kirk took full value of his right to speak. Tommy Robinson, whom I disagree with very much, has a right to speak as well.

What we need to be careful about in life is this. I was speaking to the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) about how when I am on recess I spend at least two half days on the doors, just to keep in touch with people and understand what they are thinking. The issue of immigration is massive. Now, I may not agree with all the things that are said about immigration—I have my own point of view—but I understand that many people worry about immigration. Those are not the people who are going out to wreck and smash; they are ordinary, middle-class, churchgoing people who have concerns. There are many concerns that people have. We should be careful with our words. I try to be careful with my words in this House, and I hope that others do the same.

Liz Saville Roberts Portrait Liz Saville Roberts
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We all agree that the murder of Charlie Kirk was horrific—it was abhorrent. That is the only response to it. I am sure that we also feel that it is the duty of Governments, following these terrible actions, to ensure that community safety is a priority. There is always a tension in allowing and enabling voices from across a whole spectrum, while at the same time maintaining that safety. That is one of the not irreconcilable tensions of a democracy, and it is something we must face every time we are challenged in this way.

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon
- Hansard - -

The right hon. Lady is right. That is fundamental to the society we live in and the way that we move forward. Freedom of speech is the very essence of democracy. Let me be clear that murder does not silence. As Erika Kirk stated:

“If you thought my husband’s mission was powerful before, you have no idea…what you have unleashed across this country and this world”.

Freedom of speech—that viewpoint—must be maintained.

Charlie’s message mattered to people, democracy matters to people and freedom of expression matters to people. This wonderful United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland matters to people. As the right hon. Lady said, having respect for other people’s opinions matters; it matters to me and everyone in this House. Personally speaking, I try to get on with everyone in this House. I might disagree with many things, and I probably disagree with many of the votes that are cast in this House, but that does not stop me being respectful to others. That is something we should all be trying to do.

John Slinger Portrait John Slinger
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

As a relatively new Member of Parliament, I put it on the record that the hon. Gentleman epitomises that approach to politics. He has shown kindness to me, and I am sure that that is true of hon. Members right across the House. That is to be commended. We should all try to act in the way that he does.

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon
- Hansard - -

The hon. Gentleman is most kind. I serve my God and saviour. That is who I try to represent in this House, and that is my purpose for being here.

Political violence undermines democracy by disrupting peaceful political processes and intimidating others. On the International Day of Democracy, I celebrate those who uphold democracy. The hon. Member for Cities of London and Westminster did so in her introduction, as did everyone else who spoke, and others will do the same. Unfortunately, we live in a world where those with violent vendettas seek to silence and take over, and we must never allow that to happen.

Democracy without morality is not possible. We must not forget those who stood up and fought for the principles of democracy. Charlie wanted to be remembered for his courage and his faith, which will never be forgotten. Those who share his values and feel silenced by these acts—and there are many—should not forget the importance of democracy and how many people before us fought for our rights in wars throughout history. I look to the Minister for his commitment to respect and freedom of expression, and for condemnation of these horrific acts of political violence. We must do more in this great nation, this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland—always better together—to stand up against them.

None Portrait Several hon. Members rose—
- Hansard -

Ambassador to the United States

Jim Shannon Excerpts
Tuesday 16th September 2025

(1 month, 2 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Davis Portrait David Davis
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

There is no doubt that the right hon. Lady is correct. Frankly, I am going to try not to make this ad hominem about the Ministers who made decisions; we need to make that decision later, as it were. She is right that it has diminished the standing of our Prime Minister, and I regret that. Although we are the Opposition, I want this Government to succeed in the national interest, and this is doing the opposite of that. The ambassador’s conduct, both prior to appointment and during, must reflect the highest standards of integrity—that is fundamental, and it is true for any ambassador.

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
- Hansard - -

I commend the right hon. Gentleman on securing this debate. It unites the House with its purpose. It is clear within the rules that MPs are accountable for their staff and their conduct and that there will be repercussions. Does he agree that the Prime Minister is accountable for his appointment of the UK ambassador to the United States of America, and the same rules should apply?

David Davis Portrait David Davis
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. When we look at the mechanisms engaged, as I hope we will in the course of this debate, we will see why the Prime Minister made the wrong decision. There is no doubt in my mind that he did.