Israel: E1 Zone Expansion

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 1st July 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

Goods produced in illegal settlements should not be traded with the United Kingdom. We distinguish them clearly from goods produced in green line Israel. I have said repeatedly that no one should benefit from a profit made on land that has been unlawfully procured.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

No one doubts the Minister’s commitment to bringing about change. Those hon. Members who have consistently stood up as firm friends and allies of Israel recognise its absolute right to defend itself and secure its borders. However, as someone who represents a deeply rural constituency with a strong tradition of family businesses and farming, I know that land is not a political commodity; it is a livelihood. In the E1 corridor, any unilateral land grab will disrupt centuries of agricultural practices and cut off traditional grazing routes. When farming infrastructure and small businesses are dismantled or isolated by expansion, local economies collapse, leaving families with no means of self-sufficiency. Will he Minister take time to convey those concerns to our ally and friend, and ask for immediate reconsideration of this action?

[Mr Falconer]

The hon. Gentleman makes an important point and raises a concern that many across the House have raised about the huge disruption to long-standing agricultural practices caused by the expansion of settlements.

Sudan

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Thursday 25th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Chris Elmore]

The point that my hon. Friend makes, as many Members have, about the international spotlight on Sudan is a correct one, and also applies to our domestic media. We have ringfenced funding for support for women and girls. We are offering more support and working with the international coalition to end violence against women and girls. I can assure him that one of the Foreign Secretary’s six priorities is around women and girls, and Sudan forms a crucial part of that.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for his answers. Two weeks ago to the day, I held a debate on Sudan in Westminster Hall, as the Minister will know. We highlighted all these issues, and today we are back again. Does the Minister agree that the terrifying escalation of drone strikes and the ethnically targeted violence in El Obeid demand an unyielding response, rather than the global reticence we have seen too often? Will the Minister commit to using the UK position on the UN Security Council to enforce immediate humanitarian corridors, and in particular to ensure that missionaries—there are many out there—and other British foreign nationals in the area are safe and have the support that they need?

[Chris Elmore]

The hon. Gentleman has championed the issues of the Sudanese people for a number of years, and I thank him for doing so; I have responded to debates in Westminster Hall in which he has raised, in particular, the persecution of Christians in Sudan. He is quite right to raise the wider point about the UN Security Council. Just this Tuesday, as I mentioned earlier, the Foreign Secretary spoke to the UN Secretary-General. As penholder, we have issued the clarifying statement with Norway, Germany and others, as I mentioned. He is right that we will continue to lead this work in the UN to bring about a peaceful resolution and do all we can to get crucial humanitarian aid to the people of Sudan.

Environmental Sustainability: UK-Indonesia Collaboration

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 23rd June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Kerry McCarthy]

I very much agree. We both spent the Easter recess wading through peatlands. I was going to say that we were wading up to our knees; I was wading up to my knees, but for everyone else there the peat came up to about mid-calf on them. I had very short wellies on, too—I was given children’s ones. There was an awful lot of squelching going on. Nevertheless, it was amazing to see the richness of the peatlands. We also took boats along the river. The water there is brown—apparently it is entirely drinkable—because of the peat in the water supply. I very much agree that stopping peatland fires and underground burning are as important as stopping the wildfires that destroy our forests.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Lady for rightly securing this debate. She has given us some of the problems and, in her intervention, the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) suggested some of the things that could happen to solve them.

Back home in Northern Ireland, we have a number of small and medium-sized green tech businesses. They are innovative firms, who have new ideas about how to do things. Although I am not smarter than anybody else, I think that in Northern Ireland we are capable of giving some help to others.

Might there be access for companies in Strangford to bidding pipelines or other international investments, to ensure that we can help? Obviously, it would be at a price, because that is how businesses operate; they exist to make a profit. If that is possible, perhaps the hon. Lady would be kind enough to direct me on the right way to go.

[Kerry McCarthy]

I direct the hon. Gentleman to the Minister, because she is the one with the power to put him in touch with the embassy, for example.

However, I know exactly what the hon. Gentleman is saying. I was at the desertification COP in Riyadh in December 2024, which was all about land degradation and water scarcity. I went to the UK stand, which had a number of British investors. What really struck home with me there was a small company in my constituency called LettUs Grow, which grows salad vegetables through aeroponics, so no water is required and the company has a very low carbon footprint.

It was brilliant to see out in Riyadh that countries such as Jordan and Iraq, which are managing extreme water scarcity, were aware that a company in Bristol might be of use to them in future. We need to use opportunities such as those showcases at COPs to illustrate what we do, so that our companies can find buyers in the markets that need their products the most.

[Jim Shannon]

If Members have not had the chance to go to it already, I will just let them know that the British Red Cross is holding an event in a dining room A or B today. Earlier, I was talking to a young lady who is doing some work in Nepal on water issues, including water shortage. There is flooding in Nepal, but it is projected that in about 20 years’ time there will perhaps be a water shortage in the country. The British Red Cross might have some innovations or ideas for Nepal. The hon. Lady and I both know the British Red Cross; I know that she knows it very well. There is an organisation that perhaps could help, too.

[Kerry McCarthy]

The hon. Member makes a very important point. At Foreign Office questions last week, I had the first question on the Order Paper, which was very ably answered by my hon. Friend the Minister. My question was about the Tibetan plateau, the environmental degradation there and what China is doing to divert water sources. Obviously, Nepal is part of that situation, as it is in the Himalayas. I think that a fifth of the world’s population depends on the Tibetan plateau for water sources.

If the hon. Gentleman seeks out the answer that the Minister gave me on that occasion, he will see that we have quite a few international initiatives that try to ensure that people get access to the water that they need.

If Indonesia is under threat environmentally, that affects us all, as I think some interventions today have already illustrated. Over recent decades, Indonesia has lost hundreds of thousands of hectares of forest each year. The main drivers of that loss are unsustainable agriculture, especially palm oil production, legal and illegal logging, mining, and rapid urbanisation.

--- Later in debate ---

[Kerry McCarthy]

I could not agree more. I really appreciate all the interventions, which are a very good way of getting the debate flowing, but it is quite easy for me to lose my place. I was talking about the impact of mining, logging and urbanisation, and about the fact that forest and peatlands have been damaged by wild fires. I will come on to the marine environment later.

The UK has been at the forefront of efforts to help reverse these problems. In a joint statement in November 2024, our Prime Minister and the President of Indonesia agreed a new strategic partnership, underpinned by people, planet, prosperity and peace. It included a commitment to address illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing, conservation of ocean species, sustainable supply chains and food security.

At COP29 in Baku in 2024, we pledged £239 million to halt and reverse deforestation in forest-rich nations that act as critical carbon sinks, including Indonesia. The measures included £188 million for high-integrity forest carbon markets, £48 million for blended finance for forest programmes to attract private investment and £3 million for the United Nations framework convention on climate change to support communities to benefit from forest restoration.

We have also funded some specific Indonesia programmes, including UK Partnering for Accelerated Climate Transitions, which covers low-carbon transportation and energy efficiency. Phase 5 of a 20-year forestry programme looking at timber governance, legislation and regulation has had £12 million from us. The UK partnered with Jakarta and funded the Nature Transition Support programme for biodiversity protection in key national parks and pioneer carbon and biodiversity credit markets. The Climate and Ocean Adaptation and Sustainable Transition programme is funded by the UK’s Blue Planet fund. I have several more things on my list, but I am slightly worried that I will steal the Minister’s thunder. I suspect that she will tell us a bit about what the UK has done, so I will save them for her. As I say, good things have happened, but I will now focus on the challenges.

I have been fortunate enough to visit Indonesia twice in the last couple of years. In April 2025, as the then Climate Minister, I represented the UK at the Forest, Agriculture and Commodity Trade dialogue meeting in Malaysia. Indonesia had been co-chair of the dialogue with the UK, but was handing over to Malaysia, so my visit took in both countries. The discussion mostly focused on palm oil, as hon. Members would expect, and the theme of the dialogue was smallholders. I think I am right in saying that, in both countries, about 50% of palm oil production comes from smallholders. Although it is easy for the larger agricultural concerns to monitor regulations, comply with the certification and do all the bureaucracy that is involved in that, it is much more difficult for smallholders. As we have said, we need to bear their needs and livelihoods in mind.

[Jim Shannon]

The hon. Member for Brent West (Barry Gardiner) said that the first thing for people is always to feed their children and look after their families, and he is absolutely right: that is critical. If we cannot get that right, nothing can happen. Palm oil is in short supply at the moment, so how can we better ensure that those who produce it get the price they want, and the rest of the world gets the supply it needs? We need to find a balance, so perhaps we need a working partnership.

[Kerry McCarthy]

That is probably the subject for another long debate, because it gets into the inequities in global food supply chains and making sure that farmers—whether in the hon. Gentleman’s constituency or the heart of the Indonesian rainforest—get fairly rewarded for what they do. I would say that a lot of products with palm oil in them are probably not the best elements of a healthy diet, such as the ultra-processed foods we should be stamping out. However, palm oil can be sustainable, and I will come on to talk about how we ensure that it is. Even if some palm oil products someone ends up consuming are not particularly great, there are others where palm oil is an important part of our food systems.

Indonesia is the world’s largest producer of palm oil, supplying more than half of global exports. Palm oil accounts for around 4.5% of GDP and supports 16 million jobs, with many of those involved being smallholders, as I said. This is a dilemma that many emerging economies face: going for growth, exploiting abundant natural resources to the max and boosting the livelihoods of people who might otherwise be living in poverty, or protecting their environment. However, I do not think those two things need to be at odds with each other.

It is true that palm oil has historically been linked to deforestation, peatland drainage and biodiversity loss, but Indonesia has been taking steps to address that. A mandatory national certification scheme for Indonesian sustainable palm oil, known as ISPO, was introduced in 2011. A palm oil moratorium was introduced in 2018, halting new plantation permits and revoking some non-compliant concessions, and many private sector companies have adopted NDPE, or “No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation” policies.

Indonesia has also acted more widely to protect its forests and peatlands. Forest and peatland moratoriums were introduced in 2011 and made permanent in 2019. New permits to clear primary forests and peatlands were suspended, and that was complemented by peatland restoration programmes and stronger protection against wildfires. Secondary forests are still vulnerable, however, and many forests remain exposed within existing concessions.

Indonesia’s efforts are now focused on scaling up certification, strengthening enforcement and ensuring that future growth in palm oil production does not come at the expense of remaining forests, but this is a global issue, and we cannot expect Indonesia to act alone. We know that 90% of all global deforestation is driven by agricultural expansion to meet international demand for traded commodities. What we consume in this country is contributing to the destruction of forests and peatlands across the globe. The Government’s figures show that, in 2023, British consumption of everyday goods, such as palm oil, cocoa, rubber and soy, was linked to the clearing of around 29,000 hectares of forests worldwide. That is an area two and a half times the size of Manchester—we normally say the size of Wales, but perhaps Manchester is where it is at these days.

This was going to be the point at which I called out the Government for not making more progress with our legislation on forest risk commodities. I was going to say that we cannot have any credibility on the global stage in co-chairing initiatives such as the FACT—forest, agriculture and commodity trade—dialogue or the Forest and Climate Leaders’ Partnership, which we co-chair with Guyana, if we are not prepared to take steps to stamp out deforestation in our own supply chains.

During my time as Climate Minister, I spoke often to the Minister for Nature and the FCDO Minister responsible for international development, as well as to our two excellent envoys for climate and nature—Rachel Kyte and Ruth Davis—about this issue. I also pay tribute to the team in the international forest unit, which spans the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero and the FCDO, who were great to work with.

Our conversations went back and forth on the pros and cons of going down the EU route on regulation, which was focused on the concept of sustainability, or the route proposed by the previous UK Government under the Environment Act 2021, which was based on legality. There was a valid discussion to be had about which approach was best, complicated by the fact that the EU approach would apply in Northern Ireland.

What should not have been up for debate was whether we would act at all, yet some parts of Government were arguing that this represented another burden on business, which we could not impose. Businesses such as Ferrero, which I met, were calling for regulation, as were supermarkets. The opposition within Government was a straw man to argue for delay or, in fact, for dropping the proposal altogether.

As I said, I came here prepared to vent my frustration at the delay, but I was pleased to get a heads-up from the Nature Minister last night that the Government are announcing today, at London Climate Action Week, that they are moving ahead with the regulations. UK businesses that trade in internationally sourced commodities such as palm oil will be legally required to check that their supply chains are free from products linked to illegal land clearances and the destruction of the world’s rainforests.

Freedom of Religion or Belief: Sudan

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Thursday 11th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered freedom of religion or belief in Sudan.

It is a real pleasure to introduce this debate, which is one that I have sought for some time. It is also a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker—we have been friends for so many years in this House, and I appreciate that. It is a pleasure to see the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), in his place, although he is not who I was told would be here. It is in no way a disappointment; it is just that the hon. Member for Bridgend (Chris Elmore) happened to tell me, “I’ll see you on Thursday”, but there we are.

It is also a pleasure to see the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp), who I spoke to beforehand; we have had a good friendship in this House. The Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton), always turns up at my debates—I am not sure whether that is because he is made to or because he has a deep interest in them, but knowing him, I am going for the latter reason.

Why is this debate important? Sudan has been in my heart—and in all our hearts, I think—for a long time. There are many other things that people could be doing. We are well aware of the date of the Makerfield by-election, and I know people are committing themselves to that, which I understand. The shadow Minister told me that some Members who are speaking in the debate in the main Chamber on the legacy of Jo Cox also wanted to be here. There are others who also wished to participate but are in the Chamber.

I thank the Backbench Business Committee for allocating the time to discuss the severe violations of freedom of religion or belief in Sudan. The Liberal Democrat spokesperson will bring to this debate his personal experience—I did not know until a short time ago that he was in Sudan in 2022—and his knowledge of that time there and some of the things that have happened since.

It burdens my soul when terrible persecution and unspeakable violence take place against my brothers and sisters in the Lord—Christians—and those of other faiths. Muslims have not been outside the abuse, attacks and violence. Terrorist groups are committed to destroying Sudan, and they do not seem to worry a bit about what happens.

As chairman of the all-party parliamentary group for international freedom of religion or belief, I have watched with great concern as Sudan has descended into the largest current humanitarian crisis on earth. The number of people displaced and murdered, and the level of abuse that takes place against women and young girls, are horrendous. Those things really quite annoy me, and they annoy us all. I cannot quite understand why anybody wants to be so evil, wicked and depraved against women and children. It is inconceivable; my mind cannot take it in.

Since April 2023, more than 150,000 people are estimated to have been killed—some figures are even above that—and up to 15 million people have been displaced from their homes. Famine has taken hold in the Zamzam displacement camp, and millions more face hunger, fear and uncertainty every day of their lives. Sudan is fourth in the world watch list—that is like the premier league, but fourth place in this premier league does not look good, as it is about atrocities, persecution, human rights abuses and other things taking place. The top four or five are the worst places in the world, including North Korea, China and parts of Russia.

In February, the United Nations fact-finding mission reported on the actions of the Rapid Support Forces around El Fasher. At that particular time, there were incredible reports filtering through of the murderous intent of the Rapid Support Forces and the hallmarks of genocide, particularly in the targeting of non-Arab communities, including the Fur and Zaghawa peoples. Those words should make every one of us stop and think: hallmarks of genocide—men, women and children killed because they happened to be Christians, Muslims or, as far as the Rapid Support Forces are concerned, the enemy.

The situation in Sudan is one of hatred, identity-based violence and impunity at its worst. In my lifetime, though to a much lesser degree, I have seen in Northern Ireland—you will be aware of this, Mrs Barker—how hatred is allowed to overcome basic humanity. I have always tried in my life to be circumspect about those things, to take in what happens while also looking at how we move on and bring society together. We have done that in Northern Ireland, but Sudan is nowhere near that point.

[Mark Sewards (Leeds South West and Morley) (Lab)]

The hon. Gentleman has been a powerful advocate for religious freedom right across the world, and his speech underlines that even further. Like him, I looked at the Open Doors world watch list, which said that Sudan is now the fourth worst place in the world to be a Christian. That is not just because of the war; it is because churches are being burned down and Christians are being forcibly converted, in addition to mosques being attacked and the ongoing humanitarian catastrophe taking place right across that country.

I absolutely welcome the £146 million that the UK Government have released in humanitarian aid, but does the hon. Gentleman agree that the only way we are going to get a lasting solution to this crisis is if the UK uses every lever at its disposal—including its role as the official penholder on Sudan at the UN Security Council—to broker a ceasefire?

[Jim Shannon]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his words. We spoke beforehand in the Chamber to go over what he has just referred to. There is a key role to play. We are very fortunate to have the Minister in his place, and that the Government have given that £146 million of humanitarian aid. I suspect that it probably does not get to where it should—that is not the fault of the Government or the Minister—but there is a commitment from this Government and from our Minister on that.

In reference to the points made by the hon. Member for Leeds South West and Morley (Mark Sewards), let me say that no cause, grievance or political objective can ever justify the targeting of civilians, the destruction of places of worship or the abuse of women and children. As I said earlier, the depravity of those carrying out those vile things against innocent people is inconceivable.

In Sudan, places that should be treated as sanctuaries are being treated with contempt and disregard. In June 2025, the Rapid Support Forces bombed the Sudanese Episcopal church, the African Inland church and the Roman Catholic church in El Fasher. Father Luka Jomo, a devoted parish priest, later died from his injuries. He was not from El Fasher, but his duty as a pastor and priest who reaches out to help people was to stay with them and remain there during the siege, serving a community that was predominantly Muslim. That is Christianity at work.

I would love to see a world in which we can all have different religions, if that is the way it is, but still stand up for each other. That is what we should do, and I believe Father Luka Jomo did exactly that in the most compassionate way, ultimately giving his life for the belief that he held. That speaks powerfully of his faith, courage and love for the people whom he served and ultimately died for.

Of course, this disregard for human life extends to people of all faiths. In September 2025, the Rapid Support Forces attacked a mosque near Abdul Shouk camp during dawn prayers, killing over 70 people. Those people were praying, at peace and in touch with their God, yet they were murdered. In Khartoum, the Pentecostal Church premises in El Haj Yousif, El Shegla, were destroyed by extremists and members of the Sudanese armed forces. I have probably destroyed some of those words with my Ulster Scots accent, never mind my interpretation, but I am trying to put on record my concern for all those places that I will probably never see, and all those people whom I will probably never meet in this world, but hopefully will meet in the next.

For those who flee, the nightmare often continues. There are reports of Christians—my brothers and sisters—who had fled from areas controlled by the Rapid Support Forces being arrested and detained in areas controlled by the Sudanese armed forces. It seems to be not only the terrorist groups who show disregard for human life, but sometimes the Government troops as well.

In October 2024, military intelligence officials in Shendi reportedly arrested 26 Christian men from the Sudanese Church of Christ, accusing them of being affiliated with the Rapid Support Forces. These accusations do not appear to have been based on any evidence—because there is no evidence to prove them—but on suspicion, on ethnicity and on the locations those people had fled from. They just happened to come from an area that the Rapid Support Forces had chased them from, and then the officials said that they were from that group. It really is quite hard to believe.

There are also wider concerns about what has been called the “strange faces” policy, which is rather hard to understand. Under that policy, people who are perceived— I emphasise the word “perceived”; it is not fact—to belong to communities linked with one side or the other have been harassed, detained or accused of criminal offences, even though there is little or no evidence to prove that they are guilty of any of them. Christian communities have been affected, too; many of them come from the Nuba mountains and the people are of African ethnicity.

We must also confront the horrific reality of conflict-related sexual violence. Such violence is inconceivable; it is wicked, depraved and evil for anyone to take advantage of a woman or a young girl just because they are female. Women and girls have been raped, abducted and taken into sexual slavery; one young married woman had her young daughters taken away from her and—against their will, obviously—taken into sexual slavery. They were brought up in a good home, but what happened to them is depraved.

There are reports of men experiencing sexual violence in detention, as well. There are people of depravity in control of jails and in other positions of power who carry out their most depraved acts upon those whom they have a responsibility to look after. Survivors need medical care, social support and access to justice.

I have three or four asks of the Minister, and I must say that it really is a joy to see him here. His choice of words and his tone are calming; no matter how dark the statements that he makes in the main Chamber—and sometimes such statements are pretty dark—he develops a tone that perhaps calm us; it calms me, anyway. It is important that we can relate to a Minister who I believe has the heart for the stories that we are telling. We thank him for that.

On the resources that have been made available for work not only in South Sudan but for refugees in neighbouring countries, the hon. Member for Leeds South West and Morley referred in an intervention to £146 million in humanitarian aid, which covers some of the things that we are doing. But what about those who need medical help, those facing the trauma of depravities committed against them, the young children who are not being educated, because there are no teachers and no schools to teach in, or the neighbouring countries to which refugees have fled?

The treatment of women and girls by depraved men is reprehensible. We must intervene to support those who work in this area, not simply to help those who have been directly affected, but to train a generation to understand that rape and sexual violence are despicable, and that the actions of the past cannot be the actions of the future.

The United Kingdom has a particular responsibility because, to go back to the hon. Gentleman’s intervention once again, we are the penholder on Sudan at the United Nations Security Council, and we have played a leading role on Sudan at the United Nations Human Rights Council. That gives us a duty to lead. I do not believe for one second that the Minister is not doing that, and I do not believe for one second that the Government are not doing that, but is there a better way of doing it? Can we encourage others to be, on paper, a penholder, as we are in the United Kingdom? Maybe there is a bigger role for the United States, the rest of Europe, those in the western world and those who have a heart for the people and compassion for those who are under pressure.

I think the hon. Member for Leeds South West and Morley must have read my three points; I did not show him my speech, but he ascertained what the issues were very quickly, and I congratulate him on that. I urge the Minister to press for an immediate ceasefire, safe humanitarian access, and the protection of civilians, churches, mosques and other places of worship. I ask the Minister and the Government to support the mandate of the United Nations fact-finding mission for the Sudan and to ensure that it is fully resourced and not watered down.

I am not here to criticise the Government for the moneys set aside for other countries across the world. We understand the financial pressures that are reducing those. In the debate in the main Chamber on the legacy of Jo Cox, the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir Andrew Mitchell), referred to the Department for International Development and the reduction in development spending. DFID is the soft approach; the other approach is a military one, of course, but there are other ways to do it. We have been clear that we are happy to hear the Minister’s ideas about how we can protect civilians, churches, mosques and places of worship and how we can support the United Nations fact-finding mission for the Sudan. Once we have all the details from the fact-finding mission, what plan of action will we take forward to ensure that things get better?

I also ask the Government to press for the Darfur arms embargo to be extended across the whole of Sudan and for the mandate of the International Criminal Court investigation, currently focused on Darfur, to be extended to the whole country. I am a great believer—this is a personal thing, but I believe that there are many in this House who feel the same—that while people in this world may think they get away with certain things, there is a day coming in the next world when they will be held accountable. What I want in this world is for them to be accountable for their crimes, their depravities, their abuse of women and children, their murders and their killing. I want them to be brought before an International Criminal Court investigation. I would be deeply indebted to the Minister if he could give us some indication of what is happening in relation to the International Criminal Court investigation.

There must also be accountability for those outside Sudan who are fuelling the war. If other states are supplying arms, funds or political cover to either side, that must be called out; I will mention one shortly. The United Kingdom should not be afraid to use sanctions against those who enable atrocities, inside or outside Sudan—it does not matter where they are in the world— and hold them accountable. I am quite sure that our Government and our Minister will make that happen.

There is a country that many of us feel is involved in this conflict right up to its neck. Concerns have been raised about the alleged role of the United Arab Emirates in supporting the Rapid Support Forces. The United Arab Emirates has denied any wrongdoing. It is so holier than thou, or at least it tries to be—but no; its hands are dirty and bloody, and it is time for it to be held accountable. The allegations made are serious and simply cannot be ignored. If any external state is supplying arms, funds or logistical support to those committing atrocities, it must be held to account. There must be a time when the United Arab Emirates and whoever is involved in these activities are held accountable.

I referred to the campaign for the Premier League to raise concerns with Manchester City owner Sheikh Mansour, who is also a senior political figure in the United Arab Emirates. Abdallah Idriss Abugarda, a survivor of the first Darfur genocide and leader of the Darfur Diaspora Association, has made the point that football is powerful. The first match of the world cup is tonight, and we are going to see the power of football over the next fortnight or three weeks. Well, here is an opportunity for the power of football to do something for the people, stopping the supply of arms, funds and logistical support. The owner of Manchester City should do his bit as well.

Football is powerful, and with power comes moral responsibility. It is not just about playing the magnificent game for 90 minutes plus extra time. Whether in sport, diplomacy or trade, no institution should turn away from credible concerns about atrocities. That is why accountability must not stop at Sudan’s borders. If we are serious about ending this war, we must look at not only those pulling the trigger, but those supplying funding and enabling the violence.

If the Minister does not mind, I would like some direction about any discussions with the UAE. Have there been any discussions, with the influence of Man City, perhaps? I am not a Man City supporter—this is not about what team I support. I support Leicester City, and we are now in the first division. If we are not careful, we might be in the second; I digress slightly but, when Coventry City went down, it took them 20 years to come back up. I hope it will not take 20 years for Leicester to come back. I hope it will be sooner than that.

A lasting peace can be built only on justice, accountability and the protection of all Sudanese people: Muslim, Christian, whoever. The destruction of places of worship must end; the targeting of civilians must end; the abuse of women and girls must, must, must end; the obstruction of aid must end. The people of Sudan deserve peace, justice, protection and the freedom to believe, worship and live without fear.

We must do all within our power—the physical and emotional power that we have in this country—to help the people of Sudan to change their nation and deliver hope and a future to their young people, the people of tomorrow. As a grandfather, I often think not just of my three boys, but of my six grandchildren and the place I want to leave them in. We want to leave the same thing for their young people. Women and children are valuable to God and to us, and he cares for them as we do.

I often finish with a scripture text. Today, it is Ephesians 6, where it tells us: “Having done all…stand.” The people of Sudan cannot stand alone, so my final request is that our Government stand with them and support their nation. Today, in Westminster Hall, we stand; we can do no other.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for securing the debate, and Members from across the House for their thoughtful and heartfelt contributions. The hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) has actually been to Sudan, which is a rarity in this place. I have not been to Sudan, but I have known the horrors of war.

I am particularly grateful to the hon. Member for Strangford for securing the debate because, jostling for attention with other terrible conflicts across the world, Sudan is often forgotten, despite the catastrophic situation there; indeed, it is experiencing the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. More than 150,000 people have been killed, nearly 15 million have been displaced, 33 million need humanitarian support, and 40% of Sudan’s population faces severe food insecurity. Yet, the warring parties continue. The Rapid Support Forces and the Sudan armed forces constrain aid deliveries to those most in need. They continue to commit massacres on scales that beggar belief. Appalling acts of sexual violence are being perpetrated daily against women and girls.

Of course, among those barbarous acts, worshippers are being abused, minorities targeted and places of prayer levelled. The religious freedoms of the 2019 draft constitution have collided with the reality of war. The warring parties have attacked religious sites. In particular, the RSF appears to prize places of worship because of their strong walls: fighters take churches and mosques, often threatening and killing clerics and pastors to do so, and then violently clear the area of civilians. In turn, the SAF bombards those places of worship, targeting the RSF and other rebel groups.

The destruction of religious sites is a terrible thing, but worshippers pay the highest price when good and evil collide. We have seen that far too many times: the drone attack on the El Fasher mosque that killed more than 70 people; the airstrike, days before Christmas, on a church in Al Ezba in 2024, which killed 11, including eight children; and the visit without notice of SAF fighters, accompanied by police officers and religious extremists, to demolish the Pentecostal church in El Haj Yousif.

It is not only places of worship that are being targeted. Practices that have been prohibited post al-Bashir are being carried out with impunity. Religious discrimination is reportedly rife. Vulnerable minorities are being forced to convert. Many are denied work, food or education until they abandon their faith. Hudud laws are being used to target minorities, yet the Sudanese authorities are in no state to prevent or prosecute public floggings, which had been outlawed.

[Jim Shannon]

Those who renounce their Christianity and want to convert, or Muslims who want to convert to Christianity, are denied fundamental economic rights. They face the complete forfeiture of any family inheritance, domestic violence and abandonment without financial recourse. Those who were once Muslims and are now Christians lose even their most basic rights. The hon. Gentleman is right to highlight that, and it is absolutely despicable to see what is taking place.

[Lincoln Jopp]

When these things take place, it is abhorrent to the whole House.

Laws mean nothing when the state lacks even the most basic capacities to enforce them. Among this chaos, bad actors are thriving. We have long known that Russia deploys mercenaries in Sudan in return for a free hand to smuggle gold and a Red sea port for Putin. There are reports that the Houthis are using the chaos in Sudan to smuggle weapons to their terrorist forces in Yemen.

In keeping with the topic of this debate, Iran is using its links to Islamist paramilitaries to perpetrate Sudanese civilians’ suffering. For example, the Al-Baraa Bin Malik Brigade is a Sudanese Islamist militia that has contributed tens of thousands of fighters to the civil war. The US has placed sanctions on the BBMB, but the United Kingdom has not. BBMB fighters have reportedly been involved in arbitrary arrests, torture and summary executions. The BBMB has benefited from training and weapons provided by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps—the same organisation that the Minister’s party, when in opposition, promised to proscribe. The Government are almost two years into their time in office, and only this week did they publish the text of the legislation that will make that happen.

With that in mind, will the Minister tell us whether he has considered following the US’s lead and sanctioning the BBMB or even proscribing it? How do the Government plan to use the global human rights sanction regime created by the previous Conservative Government to crack down on religiously inspired Iranian agitation in Sudan? Indeed, does the Minister see a wider role for the human rights sanctions regime in cracking down on abuses of freedom of religion or belief in Sudan?

Will the Minister tell us how the Government are pursuing accountability for the religious abuses we have heard about today? How are they gathering evidence of those abuses? Since Sudan was last raised in this House, what have they done to support the collection of evidence of war crimes, so that those responsible can be held to account? How is the UK using international courts to pursue those responsible for such atrocities?

On the big picture, I know that the House is united in wanting to see the immediate end to hostilities in Sudan. We are all aware that pressing the warring parties into a ceasefire, and hopefully an eventual sustainable peace, will require combining our efforts with those of our international allies. How is the Minister using the UK’s role as the penholder for Sudan at the UN Security Council to ensure that humanitarian aid is reaching those in desperate need? How is he using that role to tighten the screws on the warring parties, pressing them into a ceasefire and ending this barbaric conflict?

Finally, when did the Minister last engage with his US counterparts on their peace efforts in Sudan, and what specifically is the UK contributing to those efforts? Has he, or any of his colleagues, had discussions with other members of the Sudan Quad about their push for peace? How is the UK supporting the Quad in achieving the goals we hold in common: securing a humanitarian truce followed by a permanent ceasefire, securing a commitment to protect civilians and supporting an inclusive Sudanese transition to establish a civilian-led Government in Sudan?

The war in Sudan is a stain on the world’s conscience. The freedom of religion or belief abuses being carried out are utterly barbaric. Britain must exert every ounce of influence and leverage to get the warring parties to lay down their weapons immediately, to secure lasting peace and to hold to account those responsible for the crimes being committed in the name of, and against, religion.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jim Shannon]

I thank all hon. Members for their contributions. I thank the hon. Member for Leeds South West and Morley (Mark Sewards) for pre-reading my speech. He knew my four headlines, and mentioned the four of them in an intervention, delivering my speech in four words or thereabouts—that would have been a small speech for me. I know he has a deep interest in Sudan, and I thank him for coming along.

I am pleased to see the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton). He and I share many deep interests, and Sudan is one of them. We understand the issue of persecution of those of Christian faith, other faiths and no faith. We understand the issue of human rights abuse, and Sudan is unfortunately the epitome of all the things that are going wrong. He also referred to article 18 of the United Nations charter, which is core to this issue, and to the UAE. The Minister has just confirmed that 10 or 12 states are involved in the supply of arms, which gives us some concern.

It was nice of the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee) to come along. He married a girl from Northern Ireland, so he is almost a Northern Ireland citizen. He focused on the Africa strategy. The Minister kindly replied to him and said that is something he brings up regularly. We thank him for that.

The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp)—gallant Member that he is—is a great friend of Northern Ireland. He is a great friend of mine because of his service in the forces, and a great friend of all in this House for all he did to bring about peace. He focused on the 33 million people in need in Sudan. That is a massive figure. It is half the population of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland—that is how big it is. Such is its vastness that it could go from Liverpool down to the very south coast or from Liverpool up to Edinburgh. He referred to the killing of pastors and priests and the destruction of churches and mosques. If the law is to mean anything, the state must act; it cannot ignore these incidents. I thought that was important. He also underlined what the US is doing. I am sure it is doing something. It is sometimes easy to disregard that, but it is important to recognise, although it could be doing more to work collectively.

I thank the Minister for his answers and for his tone. He gave us great encouragement, and his words were well chosen and well spoken. He referred to the UK’s role as the penholder and to the graphic violence. We do not need to go into that, but just thinking about it makes me feel bad, to tell the truth. The extra £146 million he mentioned will reach another 2 million people. He referred to the 12 states that are funnelling the arms to area, but it is encouraging to hear that Sudanese human rights defenders are collecting evidence of abuses. Some of the guys who are involved in the atrocities and bestial activities will be held to account someday. The Minister is right: the fighting must stop. We all wish that the fighting would stop. We should all be encouraged that our Minister and our Government are committed to trying to find peace.

I suggest there is one more thing we all need to do. If we are not doing it, I think we should. We should pray every day for Sudan and its people.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered freedom of religion or belief in Sudan.

Myanmar: Human Rights

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 10th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Sir Jeremy Hunt]

I will respond to that as soon as I have taken the final intervention that I am going to take.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the right hon. Gentleman for securing this debate. Since the illegal military coup, the junta has executed a brutal, calculated campaign targeting predominantly Christian ethnic regions in Chin, Kayah and Kachin states as well as Sagaing and Yangon. Reports from Open Doors confirmed that historical Christian communities face unprecedented violence, with churches being bombed via indiscriminate military airstrikes. Villages have been razed to the ground and Christian pastors are being unlawfully detained, disappeared or killed. Will the right hon. Gentleman join me in urging the Government to do all in their power to support those Christians, as well as Muslims and all those persecuted for their faith in that nation?

[Sir Jeremy Hunt]

The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) and I have campaigned for many years on freedom of religion and belief, and I agree that what is happening to Christians in Myanmar is an absolute tragedy. I totally agree with the hon. Member for Manchester Rusholme (Afzal Khan) that we have to do more when it comes to sanctions.

I say to the Minister that I am very aware of the trade-offs and challenges in foreign policy, and that the environment we are in at the moment is far from benign when it comes to human rights. Tempting though it may be to say—although I know the Minister would not—that because the UK has its own problems, we should not get too involved in this, we matter when it comes to Myanmar. That is for a very simple, straightforward reason, which is that, on the Security Council, we hold the pen when it comes to Myanmar, so it is our responsibility to make sure that the UN is aware of what is happening there. Given what is happening, it is a special responsibility for us to galvanise the United Nations to do everything in its power to end the bloodshed and brutal oppression of the Burmese people.

I recognise that sanctions are in place, and I know that the Minister cares deeply about human rights, but we can do more. One of the biggest things we can do is repeat what I did in 2018 and organise a high-level meeting on Myanmar, chaired by the Foreign Secretary, at the United Nations General Assembly in September to make sure that we draw the attention of everyone who attends that vital meeting in New York to what is happening and to the terrible suffering of the Burmese people. If it is the only thing we do—I do not believe it is the only thing we can do—at least the UK will have made sure that the world knows what is happening in Myanmar.

Myanmar might not care too much about the UK as a country, but it cares about China, the country that is protecting it; it cares about the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, which is sitting on the fence apart from the brave exception of the Philippines; and it cares about the UN, so this is a major moment where we must make sure that we do our duty. There are other things. We all know that the aid budget is being cut, but if the UK finds something to support humanitarian efforts—obviously, without channelling it through a corrupt and merciless Government—other countries will follow. And for the sake of posterity and of future victims, it is essential that we give full support to any efforts to assemble evidence of war crimes, genocide or crimes against humanity, including referring the Arakan army to the International Court of Justice.

Will the Minister commit to the Foreign Secretary chairing a high-level meeting at UNGA in September? Will the Government respond to the final report of the former UN special rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar, Tom Andrews? Will the Government consider invoking article 14 of the Rome statute of the International Criminal Court to request an investigation into mass atrocity crimes in Myanmar? Will the UK sanction military-controlled banks in the way that other countries have?

Sadly, the world’s most powerful democracy, the United States, is currently showing little interest in human rights across the world. Partly as a result, some autocrats are beginning to think that they can literally get away with murder, but the US is not the only democracy on the planet. There are us, European democracies, Australia, Canada, Japan, Korea and many other countries that share our democratic values. Britain does not have to stand on the sidelines, Britain must not stand on the sidelines, and I hope that when we hear from the Minister, he will tell us that Britain will not stand on the sidelines.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Falconer]

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend, who did such a good job in her previous guise as the Minister for the Indo-Pacific. We are standing by these commitments. It will be for the current Minister for the Indo-Pacific, my hon. Friend the Member for Feltham and Heston (Seema Malhotra), to make future determinations about her portfolio.

Over the past year, we have reached more than 1.4 million people with humanitarian assistance and provided 1.3 million with essential health services. We will continue to stand by those who have been most affected.

[Jim Shannon]

In my earlier intervention, I mentioned the work that Open Doors does in Myanmar and across the world. Has the Minister had an opportunity—I suspect that he has—to contact Open Doors, find out what it is trying to do there, and work in partnership with it, for everyone’s benefit?

[Mr Falconer]

Sorry—I could not quite hear the hon. Gentleman, but I think he was asking whether we have been engaging with faith-based groups in Myanmar. We have, and the Minister for the Indo-Pacific has been focused on those questions. We recognise that the best way of reaching those most in need in these difficult times is through some of the faith-based groups in Myanmar.

Alongside critical humanitarian assistance, longer-term action is needed to end impunity and break cycles of violence. We will continue to support international accountability mechanisms, including the United Nations independent investigative mechanism for Myanmar. That work is already contributing to proceedings at the International Court of Justice and to the important investigations of the ICC. As colleagues are aware, we established the Myanmar Witness project, which verifies evidence using open-source intelligence and trains local actors to do the same.

I hear from colleagues the desire for further sanctions, but I am sure they are familiar with why Foreign Office Ministers are circumspect on such questions. We have imposed 19 rounds of sanctions already, targeting individuals and entities responsible for serious human rights abuses, but of course we keep these questions under regular review.

It is vital to lay the foundations for an inclusive future led by the people of Myanmar. That is why we support efforts to protect civic space, strengthen local civil society and enable dialogue. That includes work to improve women’s participation in peace and security, support bottom-up approaches to governance, and reinforce economic and social rights through education, health and livelihoods initiatives. Through the John Bunyan fund, we have supported organisations working to tackle hate speech, misinformation and online harms that drive discrimination and violence.

We continue to support the Rohingya, who, as many colleagues powerfully set out, have faced decades of persecution. In Bangladesh, the UK is the second largest donor to the Rohingya crisis, and the Foreign Secretary announced an additional £27 million in September 2025. That includes targeted protection and support for women and girls, delivered through local partners. My colleague, Baroness Chapman, visited Cox’s Bazar camps in November 2025 and saw at first hand the UK’s programmes of support. That reaffirms our commitment to life-saving assistance and the safe, voluntary return of refugees when conditions allow.

The right hon. Member for Godalming and Ash spoke with authority and experience about how central multilateral action is on these questions. As he says, we are indeed the penholder, and we are working to keep the situation firmly on the Security Council’s agenda, including through resolution 2669 and regular meetings. At the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly, we continue to lead and support resolutions that maintain international scrutiny and mandate independent mechanisms. We work closely with the UN special rapporteur and the Secretary-General’s special envoy. We engage actively with partners in New York and Geneva to amplify Myanmar voices on international platforms. I heard the right hon. Gentleman’s suggestion for the Foreign Secretary in high-level week, and I will pass that on.

We also recognise the importance of regional engagement—particularly the leadership of ASEAN and the five-point consensus. Through our international engagement, we consistently push for progress on ending violence, securing humanitarian access and advancing inclusive dialogue—all are essential to improving the human rights situation.

The human rights situation in Myanmar remains grave, but withdrawal or silence is not an option, and we will certainly not sit on the sidelines. Sustained pressure, co-ordinated engagement and targeted support can reduce harm, advance accountability and help lay the foundations for a future that respects the rights of all. The resilience and courage shown by communities across Myanmar, even in the face of extraordinary hardship, demands nothing less. We are committed to upholding international human rights standards and working with partners across the House to support the aspirations of the people of Myanmar for an inclusive and peaceful future.

Question put and agreed to.

Summit on Illicit Finance

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 9th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Steff Aquarone]

A quick recap: a gentle jibe at the Minister, a sharp poke at Reform and a commitment to doing my bit in helping the Government with a few ideas that might constitute a successful summit.

First, when many think of property in this country, they might think of the words of my predecessor as a Norfolk MP, Sir Edward Coke, about how an Englishman’s home is his castle. I am not sure whether Sir Edward foresaw so many being owned by a complex and secretive array of companies and trusts, lacking clarity about their ultimate beneficial owners.

Properties under secretive ownership are not only multimillion-pound mansions in Kensington; in fact, if many of us looked closer to home, we would be shocked by what we found. The Tax Policy Associates’ “Who secretly owns Britain?” map says that an unassuming cottage near the centre of the village of Cley next the Sea in my constituency is ultimately owned by a faceless company called Claystone Investments Ltd, registered in Switzerland. A Companies House search finds a similarly named company registered in the British Virgin Islands, which in turn gives its beneficial owner as a company registered in Panama. A search of the Panamanian company register gives no indication of who actually owns that cottage. That level of complexity and layers of ownership for a cottage in a quiet Norfolk village simply cannot be right.

This summit is a chance to call this out for being as ridiculous as it seems. The Government need to work with international partners to bring an end to anonymous property ownership. If an Englishman’s home truly is his castle, it cannot be a castle registered through multiple trusts, bouncing the legal rights halfway around the world and back again. If someone owns a property, they need to declare who they are and face the music, not hide behind shell companies and legalese.

It is also important that we get our own house in order on this. We have laws around beneficial ownership and property transparency, brought in under the last Government, with the help and hard work of my hon. Friend the Member for Oxford West and Abingdon (Layla Moran) and others. However, “Who secretly owns Britain?” indicates that rule-breaking is rife, and little seems to be being done to crack down on those flouting their obligations. I hope the Minister can assure us today that he is looking into the wealth of publicly available evidence of companies not doing what they are required to do, and will take action.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Member for this debate. He is absolutely right that we must aggressively pursue and prosecute the wealth managers, the lawyers and the accountants who mask dirty money through loopholes. Does he agree that, when it comes to corporate transparency, we must go as far as the Crown dependencies and the overseas territories, that we need to take an aggressive stance, and that the Minister and this Government need to follow that?

[Steff Aquarone]

I wholeheartedly agree. In fact, a past Government wrote to all those revealed by the Panama papers to ask them about their financial affairs. Might the Minister perhaps commit to doing the same for those shown not to be fully complying with beneficial ownership registration?

Speaking of getting our own house in order, naturally, I must turn to the overseas territories. When looking into opaque property ownership in my own area, I was sadly unsurprised to see that the British Virgin Islands were partly culpable for obscuring true beneficiaries. It is all well and good running a big international summit and talking a big game on transparency and fair taxation, but when we are allowing hundreds of billions in illicit finance to keep rolling through countries that fly our flag, rely on our defence and are citizens of our King, it looks as though we are not taking this issue seriously.

The overseas territories and Crown dependencies are part of our British family, but part of being a family is calling them out when they are doing wrong. So many are taking positive steps towards financial transparency, and their work will allow us to fight corruption and illicit finance more effectively, but there remain bad actors who are letting the side down. Their progress has been achingly slow, with deadlines missed, promises broken and beneficial ownership registers half delivered. The Government’s own anti-corruption champion recently said:

“I think we’re coming to the end of the road trying to do this through agreement”.

Such registers need to be free and publicly accessible. Restricting registers, or those behind payrolls with claims of legitimate interest, prevents journalists or non-governmental organisations—or even the interested public—from seeing who is truly behind these companies. We know that, in corruption and tax abuse, sunlight is the best disinfectant. For those malign actors who want to use existing secrecy to hide their ill-gotten gains, we have to smash that ability by ensuring that this information is freely available, just as is expected of anyone setting up or holding significant control in a company in this country.

I hope that the Minister can build on what Baroness Hodge has said and give a clear signal to us of the next steps that he is expecting to take if he has also, finally, run out of patience with these regimes. I can tell him and the House that most people ran out of patience long ago—hard-working, honest people who pay their way in what feels like an ever increasing tax burden. All the while, criminals, billionaires and dictators are seeing their dirty money flowing and growing, letting them live a life of luxury while we cobble together any penny that the Treasury can find to keep our public services afloat.

For those of us who are supporting the brave Ukrainians in their fight against Putin and his illegal war, we should be sickened that hundreds of private yacht transactions went on in overseas territories since the war began. Putin’s cronies, awash with blood money, are sunning themselves while Ukrainian people fight for their very future as a nation. While the Iranian regime represses protests and attacks our allies in the Gulf, the new Ayatollah has a multimillion pound mansion by Kensington Palace Gardens, just a short tube ride from here, which is one of the many ways he can launder wealth plundered from the people of Iran.

Illicit finance is a poison and cancer spreading through our country, infecting everything it touches. We have to get serious on this, and fast.

Russian Attacks on Civilian Infrastructure

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Thursday 4th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Seema Malhotra]

It is important to note—as I did earlier—the impact that sanctions are having, which has been commented on by the Deputy Prime Minister of Russia. The UK’s Russia sanctions regime is designed to maximise the impact on Putin’s regime—to cripple supply chains and technological advancement and undermine Russia’s war effort. The hon. Lady will also know that the UK has sanctioned over 3,300 individuals, entities and ships under our Russia sanctions regime; over 3,100 of those designations were imposed since the full-scale invasion in 2022, and over 1,300 of them were imposed by this Government. I could go on, including about our sanctioning of over 30 Russian banks, accounting for 90% of Russia’s banking sector. Our sanctions are hurting, and it is important that this message to Russia continues.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the right hon. Member for Maldon (Sir John Whittingdale) for tabling this urgent question, and I thank the Minister and, indeed, every hon. Member in this House for their support for Ukraine, which sends a very strong message from this Chamber. For four years, the world has witnessed Russia waging a brutal, unprovoked war of aggression in a systematic attempt to erase a sovereign nation from the map, marked by a deliberate campaign of terror against innocent civilians, energy grids and first responders. The intensity of long-range bombardment has increased by 20% in the past year, so how can we further meet our obligations to the rule of law and take whatever steps are necessary to end the war, while ensuring that Ukraine still exists at that end point?

[Seema Malhotra]

I always thank the hon. Gentleman for his questions. He is absolutely right that it is imperative that we see a ceasefire, an end to this war and the withdrawal of Russia from Ukraine. That remains our focus in the support we give to Ukraine and the continuing work we are doing internationally with our close partners on negotiations. It is also important to recognise the impact that our sanctions are having. Indeed, it is also worth mentioning that Russia’s oil and gas revenues fell 24% year on year in 2025, and by 47% in January and February compared with the same period last year. We have to keep the pressure on, and it is important that we uphold international law and our values. We must ensure that sovereign nations can continue their lives in peace, supporting prosperity and security for their people, and not be subject to illegal wars, as we have seen in Ukraine.

Lebanon: Israel Defence Forces Operations

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 3rd June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

I have seen those reports about the language used by the President of the United States in his call with the Prime Minister of Israel—I think the President confirmed that this morning. The language is unparliamentary, so I will not repeat it, but I very much sympathise with the frustration that the President feels with the Prime Minister of Israel and the conduct of the Israeli Government in Lebanon. I reiterate my support for the President’s call that the guns must fall silent, and we must have a genuine and sustainable ceasefire.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for his answers; he has an incredibly difficulty portfolio.

Israel is not perfect. I am not perfect. The Minister is not perfect. Nobody in this House is perfect. Following Hezbollah’s sustained barrage of missiles and rockets targeting Israeli towns and cities, and the murder of Israeli civilians and soldiers, will the Minister set out the Government’s position on whether they fully recognise and support the IDF’s actions in Lebanon as a necessary and proportionate response to eliminate the terrorist threat and protect Israeli civilians? Surely the duty of any Government is to protect and stop terrorists killing their people.

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 28th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mrs Badenoch]

We have another Minister coming to the Dispatch Box to say something quite different. Simon Case, the then Cabinet Secretary, set out what the full due process was. A note from the Cabinet Secretary a year after the appointment—after Peter Mandelson had been sacked and after I had asked questions at the Dispatch Box—is not an exoneration. It is part of the cover-up.

We have been told by Sir Olly Robbins, the former permanent secretary of the Foreign Office, that the Government showed a “dismissive attitude” to vetting and even argued that Peter Mandelson did not need any vetting—that is not due process. We have been told that No. 10 put “constant pressure” on the Foreign Office to approve the application—that is not due process.

Sir Philip Barton, the former permanent secretary of the Foreign Office, said this morning that he was

“presented with a decision… There was no space for dialogue”.

He also confirmed that the normal order is vetting and then announcement, but in this case the announcement was before the vetting—that is not due process.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Leader of the Opposition for securing and introducing this motion. Does she agree that there is a very dangerous pattern emerging in the Government’s judgment after they bypassed vetting to appoint Lord Mandelson, a man with well-documented security concerns? Is she also concerned about the Government hand-picking an Attorney General whose hands are still warm from defending Gerry Adams against the victims of IRA terror? It is little wonder that the people of this nation, out there in the streets, are worried and concerned. Well done to the Leader of the Opposition for bringing this motion forward.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. You are straying outside the debate, Mr Shannon, and we must not do that.

National Accident Prevention Strategy

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 28th April 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I thank the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir Andrew Mitchell) for allowing us the opportunity to speak on the topic. I congratulate him on a truly excellent speech.

I will give my perspective as the chair of the healthy homes and buildings all-party parliamentary group. This subject is of great interest to me: accidents in the home, on the roads, on the farm and on water—all those things together. As the right hon. Member highlighted, fatal accidents in the United Kingdom have risen at a rate of 8% in one year, and accidents now kill more than 23,000 people annually, which is more than the capacity of the London O2 arena. Of those people, nearly 800 die annually in accidental deaths in Northern Ireland.

I am going to give a Northern Ireland perspective to this debate. The number of accident fatalities in Northern Ireland is rising, with the region experiencing a rate of 39 deaths per 100,000, significantly higher than the UK average of 34 per 100,000. We in Northern Ireland are already on the back foot and behind on the targets, so we need to do better, hence I wanted to add my support and contribute to this debate. Almost 900,000 people, the equivalent of the entire population of Devon, are admitted to hospital as a result of accidents every year. People living in the most deprived areas are nearly twice as likely to be killed in an accident as those in the least deprived areas.

I want to highlight the issue of accidents on the farm, such as falling off a roof. I live on a farm, and we tend to do the work ourselves. That is the nature of the life. To be truthful, we might not adhere to some of the health and safety aspects—I may not have adhered to them, either—so accidents on the farm are regular things, whether they are machinery accidents or to do with slurry.

Over the past few years, I have heard of a number of people who have unfortunately succumbed to the fumes of the slurry tank. I remember my neighbour telling me last year, “Jim, I was out clearing the slurry tank and—it’s the funniest thing—I was there, and all of a sudden I was away.” It was the guy in a tractor about 10 feet away who pulled him away from it. We who live in the rural hinterland and the country are affected each day by farm issues—maybe just do not stand over slurry tanks.

I look to the Minister to highlight those issues. Back home, the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs advertises regularly on TV about the dangers of the farm. Those dangers also include overhead lines: someone could be working with a Caterpillar or JCB and, all of a sudden, could hit an overhead line and be in a tragic accident. Working with animals is another example. We must always be wary of the cow that has a young calf or the bull that is in among the cows. Things can happen, so there is a real danger.

I have been in contact with RoSPA, which welcomed recent steps by the Government to improve regulation and standards in the housing sector—which I want to speak to—particularly the commitment to implement the recommendations of the Grenfell inquiry in full. I know the Government have been proactive in responding to the Grenfell inquiry and have come up with a lot of good, positive ways forward. RoSPA has also worked with leading housing providers to produce safer by design, a framework to reduce serious accidental injury in new build homes. It sets out practical measures to reduce the shocking current rate of 6,000 accidental fatalities in UK homes each and every year.

Accidents are not just an issue in the home. They affect people on the roads, at work and during leisure time. Accidents are now the leading cause of preventable deaths in people under 40, with 840,000 hospital admissions and 7 million A&E attendances being accident-related in 2022-23, costing the NHS £6 billion and 5.2 million bed days annually, as the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield referred to. The economic costs are exceptional, including another estimated £6 billion down to lost working days and output. If we can improve the accident rate, we can improve the economy and improve people’s health, so it is a win-win in every way.

I join the right hon. Member in his call for a national accident prevention strategy. The Minister has been very active in Westminster Hall this last week—or 10 days, or even two weeks—and it is good to see her in her place again. We look forward to her answers to our requests. As the right hon. Member referred to, if we can model our national accident prevention strategy on those that have been implemented in Australia and Finland, we—including the Government and the Minister —can collectively tackle the crisis. I ask hon. Members and the Government to initiate and support steps for our constituents’ safety.

If we can address this issue at Government level, in a collective and collegiate way, we can address some of these concerns. Whether an accident is in the home, on the roads, in water or on the farm—wherever it might be—we need a national accident prevention strategy and we need it now.