Murder of George Low: 10th Anniversary
Uma Kumaran Excerpts(6 days, 7 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Uma Kumaran)
I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Jim Dickson) for securing this important debate and for his powerful support for George’s parents Helen and Martyn, and their family. He spoke movingly, and I will do my best to respond to his points.
This is a deeply tragic case that continues to have a profound impact on George Low’s family and loved ones. I also want to acknowledge the impact it has had on Ben, who survived the violent attack, and his family, who have continued to advocate on George’s behalf.
Ten years on, I recognise the strength, determination and courage that George’s family have shown in the face of unimaginable pain and loss. Losing a child is an unbearable pain and something you never truly recover from. At the heart of the debate is a young man whose life was taken far too soon and a family whose lives were changed forever. They have spent a decade seeking answers and justice for George, and I understand their frustration and their pain.
I turn to the Government’s actions. While responsibility for the investigation lies with the Cypriot authorities, the UK Government have remained actively engaged on this case throughout. Consular officials have maintained contact with George’s family and their legal representatives and will continue to do so. We have provided updates whenever new information has been available and sought clarification from the relevant authorities on developments in the investigation.
Consular staff contacted George’s family shortly after his murder in 2016 and have remained in touch over the decade since. They supported the family during visits to Cyprus, helped facilitate meetings with investigators and officials, and provided assistance during the UK coronial inquest. I am glad that the family have been able to access the specialist support services offered by the UK’s homicide service and have a dedicated caseworker in the FCDO. But, of course, what the family need and deserve is answers about George’s death.
Cypriot authorities identified two suspects and issued international arrest warrants. The suspects are understood to have left Cyprus after George’s death and are now believed to be in Turkey. The case remains open with the Cypriot authorities. Throughout this time, the British high commission in Nicosia and consular officials have pushed for progress with the investigation and prosecution of the suspects. George’s family have, quite understandably, engaged lawyers to represent them in this effort. I also acknowledge, as mentioned by my hon. Friend, the help of Justice Abroad.
Our FCDO officials are in contact with George’s family’s lawyers. At the family’s request, the British high commissioner asked the Cypriot authorities in 2024 to consider transferring the case to Turkey so that Turkish authorities could explore a prosecution. This year, further representations were made in support of that request. Frustratingly, the Cypriot authorities decided not to pursue that option. They believed it would be difficult for Cypriot officials to provide the evidence and testimony needed to support the case in the Turkish court.
The FCDO has also engaged with the Turkish authorities directly to press them to take action on arrest warrants. We will continue to reinforce that message with Turkey.
My hon. Friend asked me several questions, so let me address them in turn. First, on legal assistance, as a matter of common practice I cannot comment either way on a matter of mutual legal assistance. However, I can confirm that United Kingdom officials are following up in Turkey and Cyprus to ensure that they have opportunities to progress the case and that those opportunities have been followed up.
Secondly, on release of evidence, I confirm that we have lobbied Cyprus to transfer the case to Turkish jurisdiction. The Cypriot authorities have told us they are not in a position to do that as a result of jurisdictional issues between the two countries. I am aware that the family’s lawyer has asked the Cypriot authorities for clarity on the decision, and I have asked our officials to ensure that that is followed up.
Thirdly, on progressing the investigation in Turkey, again, I have asked officials to ensure that that is followed up to ensure we fully understand the reasons for Cyprus’s position. I have also asked officials to speak again to Turkey about its position on this question.
Finally, on my hon. Friend’s request to meet George’s family and him, the answer is yes. I will speak to my colleague Lord Wood to agree who would be best placed to take that meeting, and I will ensure they get a timely response.
I understand the pain that George’s family have felt for the last 10 years. Ten years without justice is unacceptable, and any family in their position would feel the same. As the Minister responding, it is important to be clear and honest about what the UK Government can and cannot do. We cannot compel another country to take specific investigative, prosecutorial or judicial decisions. Those powers rest with the competent authorities in the countries concerned. What we can do, and what we will continue to do, is support the family, raise the case where appropriate and pursue any credible avenue that would help move this forward. Looking ahead, the Cypriot authorities have confirmed that international arrest warrants remain in place and that they are ready to move forward if either suspect is detained, whether in Turkey or elsewhere. We will continue to press Turkey to take action.
Let me end by saying this. Ten years on, George’s family continue to live with the devastating consequences of his murder. They have shown extraordinary determination in their search for justice, and I pay tribute to them. I also want to thank my hon. Friend for his and his predecessor’s tireless advocacy on this matter. I know my hon. Friend has raised it consistently and tirelessly in this House and will continue to do so.
Although the UK Government cannot resolve the legal and jurisdictional barriers that have complicated this case, we have not forgotten George, and we have not forgotten his family. We will continue to support them, continue to engage with the relevant authorities and continue to press for progress wherever we can. Above all, George was a son, a father, a loved one and a young man whose life was cut tragically short. His family deserve answers, and they deserve to know that this Government will continue to stand alongside them in their pursuit for justice.
Question put and agreed to.
Israel and Palestine
Uma Kumaran Excerpts(1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Uma Kumaran)
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
I thank right hon. and hon. Members from across the House for their heartfelt contributions to today’s debate, and I pay tribute to those who called, cross-party, for the actions this Labour Government have taken. I thank the hon. Member for Esher and Walton (Monica Harding), my hon. Friends the Members for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger), for Rugby (John Slinger), for Ealing Southall (Deirdre Costigan) and for Middlesbrough and Thornaby East (Andy McDonald), the hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew), my hon. Friends the Members for Wirral West (Matthew Patrick) and for High Peak (Jon Pearce), the hon. Members for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan), for Strangford (Jim Shannon) and for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers), who also mentioned the work of the Father of the House, the right hon. Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), my hon. Friends the Members for Glasgow West (Patricia Ferguson) and for Wolverhampton West (Warinder Juss), the right hon. Member for Islington North (Jeremy Corbyn), my hon. Friends the Members for Bradford East (Imran Hussain), for Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley (Tahir Ali), for Stoke-on-Trent South (Dr Gardner) and for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Dr Prinsley), the hon. Member for Honiton and Sidmouth (Richard Foord), my hon. Friends the Members for Stroud (Dr Opher) and for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes), the hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Dr Chowns), my hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham), the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade), my hon. Friend the Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) and the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp).
I pay tribute to the Foreign Secretary for a deeply moving and powerful speech last week, and for taking action. The Foreign Secretary’s speech resonated with so many across the country. He spoke about the history of his family, and the power of his words and actions were felt by my constituents in Stratford and Bow. On a personal level, I felt profoundly the weight of his remarks, and of the action taken by the United Kingdom. As you mentioned, Madam Deputy Speaker, these are my first remarks from the Dispatch Box, so I hope you will allow me to reflect briefly on the poignance of this moment. The Foreign Secretary spoke of the sanctuary that his family were given. My parents, like so many, were given sanctuary in Britain, which is why I was born in east London. In one generation, my family has gone from being Tamil refugees who fled persecution and war, to their daughter standing here as a Minister in the Foreign Office. That is a testament to the United Kingdom.
As my hon. Friend the Minister with responsibility for the middle east said at the start of this debate, the United Kingdom is a country that stands up for the rule of law, freedom and self-determination, but as the Foreign Secretary powerfully said last week, many of us feel a deep sense of shame about what has unfolded in Palestine under the eyes of the international community. We also condemn the atrocities of 7 October and the murderous actions of the vile Hamas terrorist group.
In the debate, Members rightly welcomed the Government’s standing up for what is right more strongly, and being bolder in the action we have taken. The situation in Palestine is a moral emergency. What the Israeli Government have inflicted on the people of Gaza is a stain on the conscience of the world. The occupation is unlawful. There is increasing evidence that war crimes appear to have been committed. We are witnessing unprecedented violence, including settler terrorism and ethnic cleansing in areas of the west bank. It is for those reasons that the British Government have been bolder in the actions we have taken.
I have listened carefully to the concerns that have been raised, and I will try to respond to some of the key points. At the outset, let me address the meaningful remarks by my hon. Friend the Member for Wirral West on the importance of MPs not amplifying division, but promoting understanding. Many Members focused on timing and how sanctions will work, and on concerns about rising antisemitism, arms sales and E1 expansion, so I will take those issues in turn.
On timing, there is an urgent need to respond to the deteriorating reality in Palestine. We have seen a sharp rise in settler violence, accelerating settlement expansion and a persistent failure to hold those responsible for violence to account. These recent developments threaten the viability of prospects for lasting peace, security and prosperity for Israelis and Palestinians. Our immediate priority in our designations will be to prevent settlement expansion, including in E1. We have not done this alone. We are acting alongside France and Canada, and are joining the Netherlands, Ireland, Belgium, Spain and Norway, which have all either banned goods or are in the process of doing so. Many other countries—Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Poland, Portugal and Sweden—have pledged their support for further action.
On implementation and whether matters can be expedited, implementation will take six to nine months. That is a reasonable and necessary timeframe. We are working intensively on implementation. Sanctions are powerful and technical. We must take the time necessary to ensure that the measures are effective and enforceable.
On the legislative changes that may be needed, we are acting as swiftly as we can. We are also taking more immediate steps. As the Foreign Secretary announced last week, we have sanctioned a further group of extremist settlers who have supported or incited violence against Palestinian communities. We have expanded the global human rights sanctions regime, enabling swifter action against those involved in violations of international humanitarian law, whether in Gaza or anywhere else in the world. At the UN General Assembly in New York later this month, we will shine a harsh spotlight on what is happening and what must change.
On genocide and arms export licences, the UK has always supported full, robust and fair judicial processes to consider allegations, with final determinations made by competent courts before the British Government reach a conclusion. It is right that the issue has been brought before the ICJ, and I make clear that we support the court in coming to its determination.
Andy McDonald
The Minister is setting out the criteria around the crime of genocide, but would she accept that the duty actually bites when the risk of genocide is known, not at the determination of legal processes? That is when the United Kingdom has a duty to act. I welcome the steps that have been taken thus far.
Uma Kumaran
My hon. Friend makes a valid point, and as I have said, final determinations will be made by competent courts before the British Government reach a conclusion.
Uma Kumaran
No, I will carry on. The measures are not a ban on travel, tourism or visits to religious sites. British citizens will continue to be able to visit Jerusalem and religious sites in line with FCDO travel advice. The measures are not a ban on religious expression. The measures focus on settlement-related economic activity, not on people because they are Israeli, Jewish or any particular nationality or faith. We continue to oppose the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign, and will provide appropriate exemptions and continue to listen to the British Jewish community and its concerns.
I will address the arms sales question, which came up multiple times. Britain has already suspended or refused over 80 export licences used by the IDF in Gaza. The hon. Member for Rutland and Stamford (Alicia Kearns) asked how the sanctions will work and how they will be lifted. Through our new regime, we will ban the import of goods from illegal Israeli settlements and create new powers to act against individuals and companies that support, facilitate or profit from illegal settlement activity. On when the sanctions will or will not be lifted, we will continue to address and assess the actions of any Israeli Government in the future, whether in Gaza or the west bank, and the ban on such exports will remain in place for as long as the occupation persists, as will the ban on the advertising and promotion of land and property in illegal settlements.
We are working intensively on the measures. Sanctions are a powerful and technical tool, and it is important that we design them carefully so that they have the impact we intend. The measures are designed specifically to target activity linked to illegal settlements—particularly that which underpins the expansion of settlements—while protecting legitimate trade between the UK and green-line Israel.
The enforcement of sanctions is a priority for Government. The Office of Trade Sanctions Implementation, HMRC and the National Crime Agency all have important roles in enforcement and implementation. We will work closely across Government to ensure, in practical terms, that settlement postcodes will be identified and appropriate checks will be put in place to verify compliance. When breaches occur, the Government have a range of civil and criminal powers available, ranging from civil penalties to, in the most serious cases, prosecution, including powers to confiscate assets found to be the proceeds of crime. Detailed guidance will be published alongside any future legislation. Let me be clear: companies that do not take sanctions compliance seriously will face real and full consequences.
Members have rightly raised concerns about rising antisemitism. Those are concerns that we take seriously. Antisemitism is a scourge and an evil. We must call it out at every turn. In east London, where I represent, we are proud to have Jewish and Muslim communities living side by side, and long may that continue.
The measures announced are a response to the deteriorating reality in Palestine. We have seen rising settler terrorism, accelerating settlement expansion and a persistent failure to hold those responsible for violence to account. The Government must be able to disagree with the policies of the Israeli Government, uphold international law and act in relation to illegal settlements. I reiterate what the Foreign Secretary and the Minister for the Middle East have said: holding British Jews responsible for the actions of the Israeli Government is antisemitism, plain and simple.
On humanitarian support, Members have rightly raised the appalling suffering that children are enduring in Gaza. Last year, a cross-Government taskforce supported 50 critically ill and injured children, together with their immediate families, to leave Gaza and receive specialist treatment in NHS hospitals across the UK. As confirmed in a written ministerial statement in June, the UK will resume this support this year for those identified as needing urgent medical care, giving children access to specialist treatment that is not currently available locally. We recognise that many of these children and their families have experienced lasting and profound trauma.
The hon. Member for Esher and Walton raised that point and humanitarian aid matters, as well as questions on our aid budget. The Minister for the Middle East has met with the World Food Programme, and has today reaffirmed this Labour Government’s manifesto commitment of 0.7% of GDP when fiscal circumstances allow. The safety and wellbeing of the children in Gaza remains our highest priority. The United Kingdom remains committed to supporting humanitarian assistance to Gaza, where basic needs remain unmet. We continue to prioritise health, nutrition, water, sanitation and hygiene programmes. This financial year, we are providing £23.3 million to UNRWA, supporting healthcare, education, social services, emergency food assistance and shelter.
My hon. Friends the Members for Glasgow West and for Dulwich and West Norwood raised deep concerns on the support of children and students. In May, we announced a new partnership to deliver rehabilitation and prosthetic limbs for children with blast injuries. We also continue to support UK-Med field hospitals in Gaza.
My hon. Friends the Members for Truro and Falmouth and for Poole (Neil Duncan-Jordan) mentioned World Central Kitchen. This matter is deeply concerning, and I pay tribute to their constituents who were killed. The Foreign Secretary has committed to meeting them, and I thank them for continuing to be powerful advocates here. The Government pay tribute to James Kirby, James Henderson and John Chapman, and our thoughts remain with their families. For more than two years, we have pressed Israel to deliver the justice and accountability that the families deserve. We have raised this with the Israeli authorities and will continue to push for answers. However, I want to reassure my hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth and the family of her constituents that the rumours they have heard are simply not true.
In addition, we are providing a further £1 million for mine action in Gaza this year, on top of £4 million last year. Alongside that support, we will continue to work with a growing alliance of countries led by Arab partners in the region to advance the 20-point peace plan and support practical efforts to secure a lasting peace.
Last year, we supported more than 100 students to exit Gaza and take up their places at top UK universities. That support is continuing, with the first group of students arriving at the end of August, and more planned over the coming weeks and months.
Turning briefly to wider regional security, we recognise that events in Palestine are not happening in isolation. Iran barbarically slaughters its own civilians and continues both to threaten Israel and Jewish communities around the world and to threaten and endanger people across the middle east and here in the United Kingdom. Those consequences are felt far beyond the region, including here at home, through pressure on energy prices, food security and household budgets.
We have already designated Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and, as the Foreign Secretary has made clear, we will continue to target Iran’s proxy groups. Iran must never be allowed to acquire a nuclear weapon. That is why, alongside our allies, we are reporting Iran to the UN Security Council for its nuclear violations. We are also reimposing major economic sanctions on Iran in line with the European Union and United States.
The United Kingdom strongly condemns the Houthi decision to resume conflict in Yemen and in Saudi Arabia. We offer our condolences to those injured and affected, and stand with Saudi Arabia and the internationally recognised Government of Yemen and regional partners.
Let me close by thanking Members for a thoughtful and considered debate, as mentioned by the shadow Minister.
Uma Kumaran
I will make progress, as you have already given me the look, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Let me close by reiterating that the two-state solution—freedom, security and self-determination for both the Palestinian and Israeli people—is the guiding principle of this Government’s policy. This is why we are taking action. We refuse to be bystanders to further suffering and to the destruction of the two-state solution. This Government are not silent in the face of deep injustice, nor are we powerless. The only route to security for both peoples is a safe and secure Israel and a safe and secure Palestine, living side by side in peaceful coexistence.
I have seen that co-operation is possible. I visited the west bank and Jerusalem last year, when I was a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee. It was a young Israeli NGO worker who bravely led me to her friend, a Palestinian grandfather—his house had been demolished, and her security was at risk for the very fact that she had led us to him. But together, they spoke of their dreams for peace for both the Israeli and Palestinian people. It is that hope for peace and hope of the two-state solution that we must keep alive.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered Israel and Palestine.
Oral Answers to Questions
Uma Kumaran Excerpts(2 weeks, 6 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Uma Kumaran)
This Government inherited a situation from the previous Conservative Government where UK control over the vital UK-US military base in Diego Garcia was under threat. This is about the long-term safety and national security of the United Kingdom and the British people. Maintaining the long-term operational control and security of the base remains a top priority; that is the entire basis for the UK-Mauritius agreement. A financial element was a crucial part of that deal.
Dr Evans
We have heard that line for the last two years. The question that the public want answered, and the one I asked the former Defence Secretary, the right hon. Member for Barnsley North (Dan Jarvis), before the summer, is: where is the case? The former Defence Secretary said that he was looking at the details closely. Six weeks on, can the Minister confirm that the deal is now dead, as it should be?
Uma Kumaran
The hon. Gentleman asks about the payments, but he knows that this is about the long-term safety and national security of the United Kingdom and the British people. Diego Garcia is a key strategic military asset for both the United Kingdom and the United States that has protected our shared security for nearly 60 years. At the time, the Conservative Government held 11 rounds of negotiations with the Mauritians; at the time, they argued that Britain’s defence was best served by having legal certainty over the Chagos islands. Funding for the treaty will be provided within the existing spending review settlements for the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and the Ministry of Defence.
Emily Thornberry (Islington South and Finsbury) (Lab)
I begin by welcoming the Foreign Secretary and his new team to their places. In particular, I welcome the Minister; I am cross with her for leaving the Foreign Affairs Committee and we will miss her very much. She was a formidable member of our Committee, and I am proud to see her take such a well-deserved place on the Front Bench.
Now to the work. On the issue of islands that the UK— and now supposedly the United States—takes a great interest in, will the Minister provide an official response to President Trump’s latest nonsense that he might withdraw support for UK sovereignty over the Falklands?
Uma Kumaran
I thank the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee for her warm words. The UK has no doubt about its sovereignty over the Falkland Islands: they are, and will always remain, a British overseas territory, in line with the wishes of the Falkland Islanders. The UK is steadfast in our support of the Falkland Islanders’ right to self-determination. While I have seen the comments that the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee referred to, our position remains unchanged.
Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills) (Con)
I welcome the new Foreign Secretary and his Ministers to the team, and I convey the apologies of the shadow Foreign Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Tonbridge (Tom Tugendhat), who is overseas. May I associate Conservative Members with the Government’s condolences following the devastating floods in Nepal and Tibet? Our thoughts are with all those who have lost loved ones, those who are still missing—including British nationals—and the emergency workers undertaking extraordinarily difficult rescue operations.
In April, after the US withdrew its support, Ministers admitted that the Chagos treaty had become:
“impossible to agree at political level”.
However, the Government now say that they are again trying to push the deal forward with Washington. What has changed? I will give the Government another change to answer the question. Has the US agreed to amend the 1966 UK-US agreement governing Diego Garcia, and why is the Department budgeting for a deal that remains blocked by our closest security ally?
Uma Kumaran
We worked in lockstep with the US in developing and testing the deal to ensure that it meets both UK and US security requirements. I am not going to give a running commentary on this matter. The US Administration have repeatedly supported this agreement, and nothing in this treaty has changed since the US originally gave its endorsement to the deal. We have always been clear that the US Government must be content with the agreement before we proceed in ratifying the treaty, and we will continue to work with the US and Mauritius to find a way forward that is in the UK’s best interests and protects our national security.
James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)
Middle East
Uma Kumaran Excerpts(3 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Yvette Cooper
I welcome my hon. Friend’s points, because in order to have a state of Palestine, we need to support the Palestinian Authority to become a functioning and effective state. That includes funding, but it also includes pressure, because the Israeli Government are currently withholding Palestinian money, and that money needs to be restored to it. We need to be able to support the Palestinian economy as well.
Uma Kumaran (Stratford and Bow) (Lab)
I welcome the update on the new and co-ordinated sanctions announced by the Foreign Secretary today. According to the United Nations, its figures show that violent incidents perpetrated by illegal Israeli settlers in the west bank reached an all-time high last autumn—for the shameful reason that the attacks reach their peak when there are fresh olive harvests to destroy. This behaviour is state sanctioned, and settlements are state sponsored and state financed. This Government accept that the settlements are illegal, so why have they chosen not to end trade with illegal Israeli settlements once and for all?
Yvette Cooper
It is exactly because of our deep concern about the illegal settlements, and also about the escalating scale of settler violence, that we have introduced the new sanctions, which go after the organisations that have the greatest impact in terms of funding and organisational support for the settlers, where we have seen these serious problems. We have also strengthened the issues around business, because no businesses from the UK should be trading or engaging in economic activity in these illegal settlements. We will continue to work with international allies on what more can be done, both around illegal settlements and around the wider peace process. I say again that we will make progress on this wider peace process only in conjunction with our allies and partners.
Bill Presented
National Security (State Threats)
Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)
Secretary Shabana Mahmood, supported by the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Secretary Yvette Cooper, Secretary Jo Stevens, Secretary Douglas Alexander, Secretary Hilary Benn and Dan Jarvis, presented a Bill to make provision for the designation of bodies involved in foreign power threat activity; to create offences relating to bodies designated under this Act; and for connected purposes.
Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time tomorrow, and to be printed (Bill 12) with explanatory notes (Bill 12-EN).
Oral Answers to Questions
Uma Kumaran Excerpts(8 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Chris Elmore
We of course support voluntary human rights due diligence by businesses, as recommended in the UN’s “Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights”. As I mentioned in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight West (Mr Quigley), in the Government’s review on responsible business conduct, those will be some of the options that we take forward.
Uma Kumaran (Stratford and Bow) (Lab)
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)
We work closely with our international partners to deter and disrupt those responsible for malicious cyber-activity. To date, 42 international partners have supported UK activity to expose cyber-threats, and 74 countries are members of the counter ransomware initiative, led by the UK. In addition, 27 counties have publicly endorsed the UK and France’s Pall Mall code of practice, which aims to tackle the proliferation of cyber-intrusion tools.
Uma Kumaran
The Minister will remember that when the Russia-backed cyber-crime network Lockbit was smashed in 2024, it was the direct result of intensive collaboration between the United Kingdom, Europe and the United States. They worked together to defend Europe from Russia’s hybrid attacks, which seek to weaken our role in the world. Is that not a reminder that we are all safer, on both sides of the Atlantic, when we work together, and that we should never forget where the real threats to our national security come from?
Stephen Doughty
I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. Friend’s remarks. Indeed, they echo what we heard this morning from the Speaker of the US House of Representatives about working together as close allies and across NATO. It is good to welcome guests in Parliament today from the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, too.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise this issue. As is evidenced by the 2024 Lockbit and 2025 Media Land sanctions packages, the UK works closely with key partners, and remains committed to using all available tools to defend against cyber-threats. Our co-ordination with Australia, the United States and other allies demonstrates to adversaries that we will not tolerate assaults on our public and private institutions and our democracies.
Iran
Uma Kumaran Excerpts(8 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Yvette Cooper
The right hon. Member is right to condemn the horror and brutality that we have seen. We are talking to other countries about what can be done through access to Starlink, for example, to restore some form of communications. We are also talking to our allies about what further sanctions, additional pressure and other measures can be applied. Clearly, for the reasons that I set out in the statement, the future of Iran is for the Iranian people to decide, but let us be clear: we need to see fundamental change and an Iran that does not repress its people so brutally but believes in the opportunities of its people for the future. That is not what we are seeing now.
Uma Kumaran (Stratford and Bow) (Lab)
The hope on seeing the Iranian people fighting back for their freedom has turned to horror as we see the images of the body bags piled up. Over the weekend, anxious constituents have contacted me because they are unable to contact their friends and family after the regime’s imposed internet blackout. The regime is using that as a weapon to enforce silence so that the world cannot bear witness to the horror and slaughter of its own innocent citizens. Can the Foreign Secretary assure us that the British Government are putting the strongest possible pressure on Iran’s regime for its appalling human rights violations and the oppression of the Iranian people, and reaffirm Britain’s steadfast support for the Iranian people in their fight for democracy?
Yvette Cooper
I can confirm that we are continuing to raise our total condemnation of what is happening through every possible avenue—directly with the Iranian regime, but also through the different international forums—as the horrors that emerge with each day become more deeply disturbing and troubling. That is why it is so important for the international community to come together and speak with one voice.
Budget Resolutions
Uma Kumaran Excerpts(9 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Uma Kumaran (Stratford and Bow) (Lab)
I commend the Chancellor on her statement, which sets out that this Labour Government are committed to building a stronger, more secure economy, to protecting and investing in our NHS, to reducing the national debt, and to taking measures to drive down the cost of living. My constituents in Stratford and Bow will welcome so many of the measures that the Chancellor has announced today—not least the measures on investment in our energy security, which will bring bills down, and on free apprentice training for small businesses. Some 6,500 small and medium-sized enterprises in Stratford and Bow can take that up. We also have an increase in the minimum wage for 18 to 20-year-olds, an increase in the living wage, a renewed commitment to Ukraine, and the wealthiest paying their fair share.
I will speak in particular on the important decision to abolish the Tories’ two-child benefit cap. That delivers on our defining moral mission, which is to cut child poverty. The Chancellor today set that mission out in her statement with clarity and conviction, and with reference to Labour values. Appalling rates of child poverty in communities across our country are a moral stain that should shame every Member of this House. The British public want us to bring down child poverty, but they also want the return of a social contract, in which each of us asks what we can do for our country or state, not what our state can do for us.
Child poverty continues to blight our communities in Stratford and Bow. Whether we are talking about Labour’s breakfast clubs, the free school meals provided by the Labour Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, or the Chancellor’s extensive package today, it is Labour politicians who are leading the way, governing according to our values, and unpicking years of devastating Tory austerity.
In east London, our landscape has changed dramatically over the past two decades. The Olympic legacy has made east London the best part of the UK for social mobility and opportunities for young people. For the next generation of children growing up in Stratford and Bow, their background will not hinder their opportunity to succeed or excel. As a proud east Londoner by birth, I have seen that at first hand, and I know what the promise of London means to families like mine. There are more opportunities, but that does not negate the fact that we have some of the highest levels of children growing up in poverty.
Tragically, almost half of the children in Stratford and Bow are growing up in poverty. All the evidence shows that that experience produces poorer educational outcomes, physical and mental health challenges, shorter life expectancy, higher rates of infant mortality and childhood illness—the list goes on. Shamefully, that problem grew under the last Tory Government. The previous Parliament was the first on record during which living standards fell, and the Tories should be ashamed that that was their legacy. We will never forget that it was the working people in Britain who suffered the most from the Conservatives’ fiscal sabotage; they put their friends and profits before the British people. My constituents are still paying the price in their bills, their mortgages and their rents, all of which soared, while they worked harder than ever to battle the cost of living.
Let me put a human face to this damning failure. I received an email from a constituent, who said:
“I want to do right by my son and provide him the stability, care, and life he deserves. But right now I feel like I’m drowning, despite trying my hardest.”
I have read countless emails like that, and I have heard many more stories to that effect during my constituency surgeries. It bears repeating: the last Parliament was the first on record in which living standards fell. This is the legacy that we inherited. Families trying their very hardest are still floundering, still drowning.
Every child deserves safety and stability, which is why I am proud to see this Government act so decisively in abolishing the two-child benefit cap. It is a step that will make a huge difference to some of the most vulnerable families in my constituency. It will deliver security and stability to our very youngest citizens, regardless of the shape of their families, giving them the best start in life, and ensuring that they grow up in a Britain that cares for them, and to which, in time, they will contribute their talents.
When it comes to tackling insecurity, there is so much that this Government are already doing. There is so much that we have achieved in our first year in office—on employment rights, on renters’ rights, and in our schools—which is already transforming the lives of working people in Stratford and Bow. Now we are going further, following the evidence and introducing the single most cost-effective intervention for the benefit of our country’s most vulnerable children. No child should grow up in poverty. That is the resolve of this Labour Government, who are showing serious leadership. This is a decisive departure from the austerity and doom of Budgets past, and a rebuke to the seductive sophistry of populists on the right and the left—those who believe that we can balance the books on blame, and those who ignore the financial market, economists and experts at their peril. The populists’ false promises of hope are based on the Willy Wonka school of imagination, not rooted in financial reality or financial literacy. We have seen this before, in the disastrous Truss Budget. If it was left to Farage or the Greens, we would be right back there, and no amount of hypnosis can make the British public forget that.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
Order. The hon. Lady should refer to colleagues not by name, but by constituency. She will, perhaps, think carefully when referring to the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage).
Uma Kumaran
I apologise, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Once more, the challenge of delivering for Britain falls to the party of working people, the Labour party. This Budget is a Labour Budget. It will cut waiting lists, tackle the national debt, prioritise cost of living pressures, and put working people first. On behalf of the 4,470 children and their families in my constituency who will be helped by the lifting of the two-child benefit cap, I thank the Chancellor for the measures she has announced today, and I am very proud to support this Budget.
Kit Malthouse
The hon. Lady raises a very good point, which I will come on to shortly.
All of this points to the fact that, let us be honest, this is not actually a Budget about growth. I only left the Chamber for half an hour to have a cup of tea, and all the speeches that I have heard from those on the other side of the House—the “far left” side, or whatever it might be—have been about redistribution. They have all been about how pleased Labour Members are at the redistribution that is going on. That is fine, but I wish their Front Benchers would be honest about what they are trying to do, because they are sacrificing the prospect of future growth for the economy in order to tick the box on Labour Members’ political demands about redistribution. That is fine, and we have been here before. As hon. Members have said, we have been through most of these scenarios before. I am only just old enough to remember, but it happened in the 1970s. That was when we last had an openly redistributive Government—forget Tony Blair, because he was not about that—and we saw what happened to growth as a result.
To me, four things were broadly missing from this Budget. First, there very obviously is no governing philosophy of the political economy that any of us can discern. There is no plan or strategy. There is maths, there are inputs and outputs, and there is political box-ticking, but there is no sense of what kind of economy we are trying to build. There was a nod towards it in the desire to review the enterprise investment scheme and venture capital trusts, but that is really about trying to keep the lobby groups in the City happy. There is no plan to build an energetic economy.
Secondly, as has been said by a number of Opposition Members, there is no comprehension of how this Government—and I have to say, sadly, previous Governments—have damaged the return on risk. A number of Members have said that capitalism relies on risk. People go out there to invest, to risk their own money and to buy businesses, and they do that calculating the return they are going to get. If we continue to tax that return, to regulate that return and to make that return less attractive, fewer and fewer people will take that risk. If we want a scale-up economy that takes advantage of the scientific and technological inventions that we are so good at producing, we have to reduce the impositions we put on risk and make it worth while.
Thirdly, we did not have any talk about frictional taxes. The Chancellor was trumpeting growth this year, but the only reason we had a bump in growth this year was the closing of the stamp duty window, when people rushed—
Kit Malthouse
I will not give way, because I am running out of time. People rushed to fill the void, and we saw a bump in growth in the first half of the year, but since then it has been tailing off. We have to focus on the fact that frictional taxes do enormous damage.
Finally, we are at the bottom of an ellipse in human achievement, particularly in this country. If we do not get capitalism right in the UK to take advantage of that, as we did during the Victorian era, we will not build wealth for the centuries of the future, and we or our children will not live off the profits of this period.
Gaza: Humanitarian Obligations
Uma Kumaran Excerpts(9 months, 4 weeks ago)
Westminster HallRead 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
Uma Kumaran (Stratford and Bow) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Ms Butler. Some 18 years ago I was your researcher, so it is nice that you have not shown favouritism and have called me at the end of the debate. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) for opening the debate. I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on behalf of my constituents in Stratford and Bow, over 1,000 of whom signed the petition calling for this debate. That puts us in the top 10 constituencies in the country by number of signatories. Many hundreds more of my constituents have written to me about Palestine in the past few months alone, and it has consistently remained the top issue in my inbox since I was elected.
After two long and brutal years of unrelenting suffering and bombardment, the ceasefire has come as a welcome relief to millions of Palestinians. I know it is a moment that many hon. Members in this Chamber have long called for. I was in the west bank earlier this year, and I know how perilous the past two years have been for Palestinians—not just those in Gaza but those in the west bank. We speak of a ceasefire, but this weekend Israeli strikes across Gaza killed 22 Palestinians, bringing the total to over 300 Palestinians killed by Israeli strikes since the ceasefire came into force—that includes two children killed every single day.
Even during the ceasefire, Israeli authorities continue to thwart humanitarian access and block aid. As we have heard, there are devastating shortages of food, medicine and lifesaving supplies, which have spent months sitting in warehouses. We have seen Israeli authorities denying and delaying nearly a million bottles of baby formula for infants born into famine, and denying the entry of syringes needed to protect the 20% of toddlers in Gaza who have not been vaccinated against polio, measles or pneumonia. Families are facing extreme food shortages and Gaza’s health system is collapsing, leaving children without care. We have heard today how stark conditions are as winter is drawing in and tents offer little to no shelter.
Humanitarian aid should never be politicised. There is absolutely no justification for the restrictions on vital humanitarian assistance. Yet, when there are attempts to deliver such assistance, Israeli authorities claim they only block items that might have a dual use or some potential military purpose. What defence risk is there to vaccinating babies? What possible military use could there be for newborn formula? UNRWA says that enough aid to feed the entire Gazan population for three months is waiting in warehouses. It is ready to enter, yet it is still not permitted in. Earlier this year, I met the Jordanian delegation, who told me that tonnes of aid are sitting in trucks on its borders, not allowed in.
At the time of the ceasefire, UNICEF alone had 1,300 trucks sitting ready to bring in tents, nutrition, water and sanitation supplies. It also provides education and recreational kits for children: items such as balls, board games, chalk and skipping ropes—none of which have been allowed into Gaza for months. Those children are already facing the harsh and devastating consequences of war, which will live with them for their lifetimes. What military function does a game of snakes and ladders have? What possible threat is there to Israeli forces from a Palestinian child playing football?
The so-called Gaza Humanitarian Fund was a system unable—or perhaps unwilling—to distinguish between military threats and humanitarian aid, between weapons and toys. It cannot be a model for future aid delivery. Only an impartial humanitarian regime can deliver relief and dignity for the people of Gaza. As this ceasefire is consolidated and the peace plan developed, it is essential that we see unfettered access to humanitarian assistance and a recommitment to humanitarian principles. I join hon. Members across the House, including those who have spoken today, in calling on the UK Government to support the restoration of an independent and neutral humanitarian scheme capable of delivering aid safely, effectively and at scale. I echo the call to the Minister to clarify the critical objectives of ensuring that British aid charities, such as Medical Aid for Palestinians and Oxfam, can operate freely and without restrictions in Gaza, with unhindered entry for their staff and medical teams and the ability to take in humanitarian supplies.
We owe it to the Palestinian people not to look away from the devastation, but to bear witness to what has been inflicted on them. We owe it to them to bear witness to this history, to this ongoing genocide, but also to continue to ensure that Britain plays its full part in the humanitarian assistance and rebuilding of Gaza.
Conflict in Sudan
Uma Kumaran Excerpts(10 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead 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
Mr Falconer
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his commitment to these issues. I can reassure him that I have been in north Africa twice in the past two weeks, and the ministerial team will continue to pay Africa the attention that it deserves. I will have to revert to him on the question of the timetable for publishing the Africa strategy.
Uma Kumaran (Stratford and Bow) (Lab)
Despite it being the largest humanitarian catastrophe on the planet, and despite the mass rape and slaughter of civilians, when it comes to Sudan, it feels like the world has taken a moral holiday. The atrocities in El Fasher were entirely foreseeable—this conflict is not new. I understand that the Foreign Secretary is leading the fight to keep Sudan on the agenda and to secure accountability for the mass atrocities in Darfur, but does the Minister agree that it is time that global leaders followed the UK’s example and showed the moral resolve, the moral courage and the leadership needed to end this deadly assault?
Mr Falconer
I thank my hon. Friend for making that important point. It is one with which both I and the Foreign Secretary agree. As she said at the weekend, the world must do more.
Official Development Assistance Reductions
Uma Kumaran Excerpts(10 months, 2 weeks ago)
Westminster HallRead 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
Edward Morello
I agree 100% with my hon. Friend. Purely on a value-for-money basis, it is wiser to spend money where people are, to prevent them from getting on the road, than to try to house them here.
Migration and global instability do not begin at our borders. They begin when climate change destroys livelihoods, when wars displace families and when hunger drives desperation. Compassion and prevention are not opposites of security; they are the foundations of it.
Climate change remains the single greatest threat we face. Carbon knows no borders; it does not respect treaties or national boundaries. If we cut funding to those on the frontline of climate vulnerability, we are cutting our own future resilience. Whether that is in the Caribbean, the Sahel, the middle east or the Pacific, our partners need leadership, and Britain should be that leader.
The Government’s commitment to meet their £11.6 billion international climate finance pledge by 2026 is welcome, but it is increasingly hollow if other aid streams are being dismantled. We cannot claim climate leadership while simultaneously cutting the very funds that protect vulnerable nations from its impact and help them to decarbonise sooner. The UK has always been at its best when leading with principle and pragmatism. We led on eradicating smallpox, on fighting HIV/AIDS, on girls’ education, on tackling modern slavery and, of course, on the creation of the United Nations.
Today we must show that same moral courage. The cuts to the ODA budget are not only a betrayal of those values, they are a strategic mistake. Every pound we invest in aid saves far more in the long term, by preventing wars, stopping pandemics and reducing the need for emergency interventions. We live in a globalised society. Our economies, supply chains and security are inter- connected. Disease, conflict and climate crisis spread across borders with ease. To imagine that Britain can isolate itself from those realities is naive; if we fail to act abroad, we will pay the price at home.
I pay tribute to the humanitarian workers who continue to serve in some of the world’s most dangerous environments, and who risk their lives daily to deliver aid. They embody the best of British values, yet their work is getting harder. From Gaza to Sudan, from the Democratic Republic of the Congo to Ukraine, aid workers face extraordinary challenges. In 2024, one in eight people worldwide was exposed to armed conflict. Humanitarian staff have been detained, attacked and even killed, and entire operations have been halted due to insecurity. Our response to that sacrifice should not be to cut funding for their organisations—they deserve not only our gratitude but our tangible support. We must ensure that safeguards and funding are extended to humanitarian workers, who represent British values in the most fragile corners of the world.
The Government expect aid reductions to provide £500 million for defence in 2025-26, £4.8 billion in 2026-27 and £6.5 billion in 2027-28. That may satisfy Treasury spreadsheets, but it will come at the cost of lives, stability and influence. In the coming weeks, this House will debate spending priorities at the Budget. The timing of this debate could not be more important. It is a time of hardship and high costs of living for all. There are difficult decisions to be made, both domestically and abroad. But we should remember that the choices we make here ripple far beyond our own borders. They shape how the world sees us, and how safe, stable and prosperous our shared future will be.
Uma Kumaran (Stratford and Bow) (Lab)
Does the hon. Member agree that at a dangerous moment geopolitically, with tensions high and multilateralism facing challenges—which, as members of the Foreign Affairs Committee, we are more than aware of—it is incumbent on all of us to advocate an approach that treats global co-operation, our international obligations and our defence and security as interconnected?
Edward Morello
I agree 100% with the hon. Member. The more we work with our partners, the more we can deliver. We are living in an interconnected society; there is no way we can do this alone. We must work with others, and we must show leadership in that space.
If aid spending remained at 0.5%, it would have reached £15.4 billion by 2027. Instead, it will stand at £9.2 billion, the lowest in real terms since 2012. When we retreat, Russia and China advance; when we stay silent, violence speaks for us. There can be no security without stability, and no stability without development. Development is not an add-on to security and foreign policy, but what that policy is built on.
I therefore urge the Government to reconsider the planned reductions ahead of the Budget, and to bring forward sustainable, long-term plans for funding both our defence and our diplomacy, rather than setting them in competition. I urge them to recognise that global leadership cannot be built on cuts and withdrawals, but on conviction and compassion. The world we are shaping today, through the choices we make on aid, diplomacy and climate will determine whether future generations—our children and grandchildren—inherit a planet of opportunity for all.
We must stand up for liberal values, for compassion and for the rules-based international order. Britain has always stood tall on the world stage. Our leadership has mattered. It must matter again.