Israel and Palestine

I beg to move, That this House has considered Israel and Palestine. As this is my first debate as Minister of State for the middle east, I want to begin by paying tribute to my predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), who spoke from the Dispatch Box on this important issue many times with great conviction and clarity. I also acknowledge the broad terms of the debate today. With your leave, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will focus on very specific issues, but I am sure that hon. and right hon. Members will want to cover a number of topics. I acknowledge the strong views of Members from across this House, and indeed various views on issues relating to Israel and Palestine are reflected in my constituency of Cardiff South and Penarth, where, I am proud to say, we have people from many different backgrounds and heritages. I am proud to represent constituents of Palestinian and Israeli backgrounds, and of a diversity of faiths and none. I draw attention to my past work on these issues in my time as an MP in this place and as a Minister, and to my declarations. As my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary said in the House last week, we need to start from clear principles: this is a country that stands up for the rule of law, freedom, self-determination, and in this case, the cause of peace, and of a secure future for all Israelis and Palestinians. It is with those principles that we approach this important issue.

I commend the Minister, who is much liked in this House. He always puts forward a balanced point of view. I have to say that at the weekend, after the decision taken by the Labour party last week, my Jewish friends and constituents, and other contacts from Israel, have been on to me in large numbers, expressing deep concern about what the Labour Government have put forward. Ever mindful that this is a time of unprecedented threats from Hamas and other terrorist entities, they say that the Government and Labour have introduced a “one-sided” trade ban. If that is the case, how can the Minister and the Government reassure my constituents about our deeply important security and intelligence sharing with Israel? There is a danger of a major diplomatic clash with Israel and the United States of America. These drastic steps will affect the lives of British people and, in particular, Jewish families.

The hon. Gentleman raises significant points about the important security, intelligence and defence relationship that we have with Israel. I will be clear at the outset that the measures that we have taken very much relate to our dispute about the actions of this Israeli Government, not of Israel, and certainly not of the Israeli people. With regard to his Jewish constituents, I absolutely recognise the significant concerns and fears about the threats that Jewish communities in this country and across the world face, particularly from rising antisemitism and violence. Of course, we have marked some very sombre events in recent weeks—I have heard that reflected from my Jewish constituents—and I can absolutely assure him that the Government engage closely with representatives of the Jewish communities in this country. He will also recognise that a range of views have been expressed about the Government’s announcements last week. I want to be clear that the British people, including those with ties to the region, want the suffering and violence in the region to end; a path to peace; and a two-state solution restored, in which a safe and secure Israel exists along a sovereign and viable Palestine. That is within the context of recognising the very real threats that Israel faces, including from Iran and its proxies.

The Minister will have to be very careful about what we say and do because of the effect on Jews in this country. In that regard, what assessment has he made of the Campaign against Antisemitism’s findings on Jew hate in our national health service? Does he agree that everybody needs to be assured that when they are at their most vulnerable, they will be dealt with equitably, without reference to their colour, creed, race or anything else? Yet we find that patients are being abused simply because they are Jewish, and that Jews working in the NHS are being disadvantaged.

The concerns that the right hon. Gentleman raises are very serious, and he can be absolutely assured that the Government want to root out antisemitism in all its forms in this country, and indeed in every walk of life, whether in the health service or in education; I have heard very concerning examples of antisemitic incidents in schools and universities. That is why this Government are investing not only in the security of Jewish communities in this country, but in specific measures in public services. I take very seriously any concerns that he raises; of course, he has distinguished medical experience himself. It is also important to recognise that next month will mark three years since the atrocity of 7 October, which was, as the Foreign Secretary said, “a murderous act by a murderous terrorist organisation designed to massacre and instil fear across a whole population.” —[Official Report, 8 September 2026; Vol. 790, c. 879.] It was designed not only to cause death and destruction in Israel, but to instil fear across the world. This was the worst attack on Jewish people since the Holocaust, and I want to be clear again that there is no justification for the actions of Hamas, or their rejection of the peaceful co-existence of Israelis and Palestinians. They can play no part in that future, and they must disarm. We avidly and continuously support the 20-point plan, and the efforts to bring about peace and a secure future for the people in Gaza and across the whole of Palestine. I also want to make it clear, as the Foreign Secretary did, that we reject those who make any attempt to de-legitimise Israel, or to support the so-called BDS— boycott, divestment and sanctions—movement. Our disagreements are with the Government of Israel and their actions, not with Israel, and certainly not with the Israeli people.

My hon. Friend mentions the commitment to peace long term, but unfortunately it has never seemed further away than it does today. Peace will involve building bridges between communities in Palestine and Israel, and supporting civil society, which has been under attack, in Gaza and in Israel, unfortunately, by the Government. My hon. Friend’s predecessor and the last Prime Minister committed to the international peace fund, which many of us were advocating for. Can my hon. Friend provide an update on the Government’s position on the peace fund, and their support, I hope, for its continuation and growth? What role does he think it can play in building these bridges?

I wholeheartedly support the type of work that my hon. Friend describes; indeed, he has been involved in various initiatives over the years, in a range of conflict contexts. He will be happy to know that I have just answered some parliamentary questions on the international peace fund; that will hopefully provide him with the reassurances that he seeks. The appalling reality in Gaza and the west bank is placing the two-state solution that we all want to see under immense strain, as are the actions of this Israeli Government. As the Foreign Secretary has set out, Gazans have endured unimaginable trauma and suffering for three years. There is increasing evidence that war crimes appear to have been committed, and we support legal processes to determine whether that is so. At the same time, we are witnessing unprecedented violence on the west bank, including settler terrorism and ethnic cleansing perpetrated by settler terrorists. We condemn settler violence and settlement expansion, which are contrary to international law and a grave threat to the two-state solution. The question has been asked: why now? Why was it necessary for the Government to act? I will set out clearly the reasons for doing so. We need to recognise that last year was a record year for new settlements. In August, we saw a long-standing red line crossed when the E1 tenders were issued for more than 1,200 homes. The Foreign Secretary pointed out that at the time of Oslo, around 270,000 settlers lived in Occupied Palestinian Territories. Today it is some 750,000, and more settlements have been approved in the four years of this Israeli Government than in the previous 20 years. We have seen 65 Palestinian communities completely expelled since October 2023 and a total of over 4,000 Palestinians evicted from their homes due to settler violence and state actions. This Government refuse to stand by and watch further suffering and the destruction of the two-state solution.

I commend my hon. Friend, and the Foreign Secretary last week, for the tone in which they have set out this recent decision on the settlements. I, too, have Jewish constituents who are very scared, but it is right, as the Minister said, to call a friend out when their behaviour goes too far. We know that there are big issues about the legal definition of genocide in Palestine. I wonder whether the Minister, or the Department, has had any conversations with the Israeli Government or the ambassador to the UK about the Foreign Secretary’s statement last week, and whether the Minister could update the House.

In advance of the statement, when the Foreign Secretary came into office and I took on this ministerial role, we were of course in contact with the Israeli Government. The Foreign Secretary spoke to Foreign Minister Sa’ar, I spoke with the Israeli chargé here, and we have had continual contact with the Government of Israel about our concerns and what we believe needs to change. My hon. Friend will have seen the reaction and the commentary in recent days, which was deeply regrettable and deeply unfortunate, but of course we maintain close and important links with Israel on a range of other measures. This is very much focused on the actions that we see on the ground—the actions of, for example, settler terrorists and those who are backing them in expanding those settlements, and the withholding of aid to Gaza. This is not a quarrel with Israel, or the Israeli people. We should always be proud that it was a Labour Government who took the historic decision to recognise the state of Palestine. It is also important to recognise our engagement on furthering the agenda of reform and inclusion in the state of Palestine; we work very closely with the Palestinian authorities, hampered as they are by the continued withholding of tax revenues and a range of other measures taken by the Israeli Government. As I said, we have been resolute that Hamas cannot be part of government going forward and must disarm. As many people have said, we have worked with the Palestinian authorities closely on the reform of prisoner payments, and welfare payments must be needs-based. We are very clear that there needs to be reform and an inclusive process in Palestine. We want a viable, secure, prosperous and well governed Palestine going forward, and we have always been there as a partner to enable that. As for that state being threatened geographically, or in the functioning of its institutions, if we say that we believe in a two-state solution, we must believe in two states, geographically and in terms of ability to function. We have seen that goal come under even greater pressure in recent times. We have been very clear in our engagement with both the Israeli Government and the Palestinian Government. I spoke to the Palestinian Foreign Minister recently, and have also engaged with those involved in the transitional processes that will hopefully lead to a settlement and a new Administration in Gaza. I met with the head of the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza when I was in Egypt recently, and have discussed, even in these difficult times, the ways we can look to a positive and productive future. I must be clear, as the Foreign Secretary was, that the official view of this Government is now that Israelis’ continued occupation of Palestine is unlawful. That concurs with the central finding of the June 2024 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice. We have come to that conclusion for a range of reasons. The Foreign Secretary and others have mentioned that Israel’s entrenchment of its control, its intention to extend permanent sovereignty, and its expansionist agenda and support for and facilitation of illegal settlements are key in this. That is our clear position. It is very important that I set out our values, what we aim at and the legal position, and that leads us on to the actions that we must take.

I know of constituents who have moved from Israel to Leeds because of the actions of the Israeli Government, and who applaud what we have done in banning Israeli settlement goods and services. Many of us stand squarely behind international law and human rights, and commend the Minister and the Foreign Secretary for their actions.

I thank my hon. Friend for his support. I know that he has extensive experience on these issues, and he is right that many, diverse voices across this country have welcomed our actions.

The Minister has been very generous in giving way. In his discussions with the Government of Israel, has he ever raised the issue of Israel never defining what its borders actually are? That seems to me to be a fundamental problem in any discussions on this issue going forward.

Ultimately, we have always been very clear, as the right hon. Member will know, that these matters must be determined in future negotiations. Fundamentally, when we talk about the actions that we are taking, we are clear about 1967 and the green line. When it comes to the actions that I will talk about, we make very clear distinctions between illegal settlements and green-line Israel. The Foreign Secretary announced new sanctions regimes, and powers through which we will ban trade in goods from illegal Israeli settlements. We will also take action on services; we will create new designation powers to go after individuals and companies that support, facilitate or profit from illegal settlement activity. We will ban advertising or the promotion of land and property in illegal settlements, and we will strengthen our existing global human rights sanctions regime to go after those who defy international humanitarian law, be it in Palestine or around the world. I can think of a range of other contexts for this, as sanctions Minister, and a range of other matters that Members raise in this House, including in relation to Sudan, Yemen and Myanmar. It is important that the Government have the power to act against those who defy international humanitarian law, deny access to humanitarian aid or frustrate the actions of humanitarian organisations. We are using our existing global human rights regime to sanction several extremist settlers who have supported or incited acts of violence against Palestinian communities.

The Minister is being incredibly generous. He has been very clear that Hamas cannot play a part in whatever future settlement there may be, and I welcome that, as I know my Jewish friends and my constituents would too, but can the Minister outline how he envisages that future, in which Hamas can play no part, to look? I would be very keen to hear his ideas.

Key to that will be ensuring that Hamas put down their arms, and I think important lessons can be learned from the hon. Member’s part of the world. Imperfect as many matters are there, we have important lessons that we can share, in relation to not just Gaza but other contexts too. I have been discussing that with a range of partners over recent times. We have a process in place. We have the 20-point plan and the 15 points; it is deeply regrettable that we have not made further progress in recent weeks and months. We will work closely with the United States and other partners to further that agenda and find a way forward, but it is absolutely clear that we need to have unity, a functioning state between Gaza and the West Bank, and a state of Palestine that can function, and to ensure that all forms of violence and extremism are rooted out.

On a functioning state, one of the issues raised with me by constituents who have come to my surgery—people from the synagogue and people who volunteer in Palestine—is that the Israeli Government have withheld $5 billion in revenue from the Palestinian people. It was curtailed in 2019 but then stopped in 2023. That money should be going towards hospitals, schools and a functioning state, as the Minister says. Has he had meetings with the Israeli Government about the return of those revenues, maybe through a third party that they could trust, to make sure that the money goes to the right places?

We have raised those issues on a regular basis, and I have discussed with Palestinian Ministers the impact that it is having on their ability to function. My hon. Friend raises a very important point. I will make a little progress, because I know that a lot of Members want to speak. I know that a number of Members will want to raise the issue of arms sales and export licensing. I want to be clear to the House that we have already suspended or refused more than 80 export licences in relation to Gaza, and our suspension remains fully in place. I also remind hon. Members—there is a lot of misinformation about this issue—that not all export licences are for military purposes or indeed provided to the Israel Defence Forces; they include exports of crucial medicines, body armour, defensive capabilities and material that is not used in Israel but is used in important components for allies. I want to emphasise very clearly, as the Foreign Secretary said, that because of our view that the occupation is itself unlawful we will also now refuse all licence applications for arms and other exports that materially contribute to the occupation. In effect, that provides a double lock against all relevant exports, on the basis of which we will determine our export licensing. That means that the ban on exports will remain for relevant items as long as the occupation persists—that is very clear. I want to clarify, because it is important, what these measures will not do. Our sanctions regime will not target important and valued trade with green-line Israel. We oppose the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions campaign, including attempts to exclude Israel from, for example, sports or cultural activities. This is not a ban on travel or religious visits or, indeed, religious expression—that is very important. We will put in place the appropriate religious exemptions, and I thank all those who have raised important and sensitive matters with us on that. It is important that we listen to those communities and also that we do not share misinformation around what this regime does or does not do. We will work to ensure that the measures we set out do not have unintended consequences. On the timing, the expanded global human rights regime will come within weeks. We expect the legislation for the wider new sanctions in relation to settlements to take around six to nine months, but as the Foreign Secretary said, if we can do it sooner, we will. I want to explain to the House that because sanctions are impactful and powerful, but also technical, we have to take time to carefully design them to ensure that they have the impact we want, that they are lawful and proportionate, that they do not have unintended consequences and, crucially, that they are enforceable.

Can I raise the “NAZA” film that was recently shown at the Venice film festival? It talks about the targeting systems that the IDF used in Gaza, and where it had specifically waited for Hamas fighters to return home so it could target them in a place they knew, but with huge civilian casualties. One whistleblower suggested that 500 civilians were killed in a strike on a single Hamas target. To give a UK example, something similar happened against three former British servicemen at the World Central Kitchen. Could the Minister reflect on that documentary and how we will get accountability for those former British servicemen who were killed with this awful targeting system?

I have not seen the documentary that my hon. Friend mentions, but the fact is there have been horrendous humanitarian deaths, including the ones he mentioned and, of course, appalling numbers of civilian deaths in Gaza. The Foreign Secretary and I were clear that the decision about World Central Kitchen was shameful. We have been in contact with the families and have obviously urged the relevant authorities to reconsider that decision. In the end, all these matters will be reviewed and understood by courts and other competent authorities, but there is significant evidence of atrocities being committed, and I have been very clear on that specific case. I am clear that we are already taking action on those involved in settler violence, using the powers we have. That includes the five extremist settlers that we sanctioned last Tuesday, and we have also, alongside partners including Australia, Canada, New Zealand and Norway, sanctioned extremist Israeli Ministers Smotrich and Ben-Gvir in their personal capacities in response to their repeated incitement of violence against Palestinian communities. It is also important to say—this perhaps did not receive as much attention last week, but it is very important—that we absolutely recognise the threats that Israel faces, and not only Israel but other countries in the region, from Iran. That is why we imposed a number of sanctions on Iran last week, and we also sanctioned Lebanese Hezbollah. In the light of the actions we see in Yemen and around the Bab al-Mandab, we also absolutely condemn the actions of the Houthis—the atrocities they are responsible for—and we are working closely with partners, including the Government of Yemen and others. But it is absolutely crucial to recognise that the Houthis have previously struck against Israel. I want to reiterate—I am conscious that we are in the high holy days—that no community must face discrimination, violence, hate or the threat of violence. Antisemitism disgusts me, as I am sure it does all of us in this House, and the Foreign Secretary is very clear that the actions we took are against the Israeli Government, not Israel, not its people. In any case, holding British Jews responsible for the actions ever of the Israeli Government is antisemitism, plain and simple. I have heard directly from Jewish communities in my own constituency the threats and risks they face—I know we have all heard similar. We are living in a time when we have had the horrific attacks in Heaton Park and, indeed, what we saw in Golders Green. That is why we are investing £250 million for community security. We are taking action on antisemitism in schools and communities. In October, the Foreign Secretary will host representatives of the J7 to discuss how we can work across borders to tackle antisemitism. I praise the work of my hon. Friend the Member for High Peak (Jon Pearce) on post-Holocaust issues and, more broadly, the work of my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) on freedom of religion and belief. I will conclude, because I know many Members want to speak, by saying that we know the actions we announced last week would prompt strong reactions, but that did not mean they were any less necessary. It is deeply regrettable that the Israeli Government have announced measures, such as wanting to close our consulate in Jerusalem, but we stand by our actions. If we are guided by values, by the law and by the facts on the ground, we need to see action and leadership. That is the right thing to do to defend the two-state solution, which is in the interests of Israelis and Palestinians, but also in our national interest, and we have been joined by others, including France and Canada. Peace and security depend on our resolve to create the conditions in which Israelis and Palestinians can live side by side in their own states, confident in their futures. We might be far from that hope being realised at present, but it is one that we will work absolutely assiduously to deliver, and we have to speak and act with clarity to achieve that. I look forward to the contributions of Members across the House and am glad to have been able to open the debate.

I call the shadow Minister.

I start by expressing our condolences following the death of a member of our armed forces in Ukraine on Saturday. I thank them for their service and say to their family that we hold them very much in our hearts. As we approach the anniversary of Hamas’s barbaric 7 October terrorist attacks next month, we also approach three years of war. Two hundred and fifty-one people were kidnapped that day, over 1,200 murdered and hundreds raped. It was not until this January that the remains of the final hostage were brought home—may their memory be a blessing. After three years of immense suffering, recent months have, on paper, hinted at real progress towards peace: a UN Security Council resolution, a road map and transitional committee, and the first Palestinian legislative election since 2006 scheduled for November. Yet on the ground, neither the Israeli nor Palestinian people feel any safer. Hamas remains armed despite promises to the contrary, and Iran remains a destructive force, willing to sacrifice the futures of whole nations through its proxies in Palestine, Yemen, Lebanon and Iraq, creating instability to ensure the survival of its own despotic regime. As the shadow Foreign Secretary, my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Tonbridge (Tom Tugendhat), set out last week, there is much we agree on across this House, and even where differences of approach exist, we share a deep concern that current events are taking Israelis and Palestinians towards a darker future. We are acutely aware of the immense suffering in Gaza and the fragility of attempts at peacebuilding. We agree that some Israeli Ministers have espoused unacceptable, dangerous and hateful rhetoric, even targeting our own country in recent weeks, and that groups of settlers in the west bank are engaging in illegal acts and violence, often encouraged by this same rhetoric. We also know that most in Israel reject this and seek a peaceful future, and we must keep them in our minds and not mistake the loudest voices as the most representative. Before I turn to the Government’s decisions, let me say something as a friend of Israel, as someone who has worked with Israel to defeat shared enemies such as Daesh. We have learned from failures in Iraq and Afghanistan that how you prosecute the operation to defeat terrorists determines whether you build and secure peace for your people in the long term. You do not defeat an insurgency by creating conditions in which the next generation is recruited. My fear is that three years on, Hamas is still armed, still governing and still recruiting. Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari, then spokesperson for the IDF, said, “Hamas is an idea,” and that those who believe that it can be eliminated by force alone are mistaken, and he is right. You cannot bomb an ideology out of existence; you must allow an alternative and create the space for political transition. That is not a moral nicety; it is the operational lesson of every counter-insurgency campaign our country has ever fought, including those we have lost. The defeat of Hamas is important to our security here in the UK, and these lessons cannot be dismissed if we are to create a safer future for us and if the region is to find peace. We all want a better future for the Israeli and Palestinian people, but to do so, we must have constructive channels of communication open with our partners in the region. As Foreign Secretary, Lord Cameron was able to secure additional aid to Gaza and to open new crossings by using our relationship to benefit those most in need. It is imperative that the Government maintain those relations to reflect the strategic importance of this relationship and to allow us to continue to influence events as friends. I believe the world is a better place when Britain is at the table, and more clarity is needed on the Government’s position. The Board of Peace’s efforts have largely been rejected, at least on sequencing. Hamas will not disarm first, Israel will not withdraw first, but the Government have said nothing about the British view of what the sequencing should be, and that silence benefits no one. With Israeli elections next month and Palestinian elections in November, there is a small glimmer of hope that they will bring more moderate voices to the fore. That is why we remain concerned that the sanctions announced by the Government so close to the Israeli election may empower the very voices most opposed to peace. Before the Foreign Secretary’s announcement, Israeli news was awash with headlines that Netanyahu allegedly failed to pass on a warning from the President of the United Arab Emirates to Israeli intelligence 10 days before the Hamas attack. Britain’s sanctions wiped that off the news cycle; it is no longer being discussed. Given that Israel, a true democracy, is about to go to the polls, did the timing not warrant more reflection? I have spent years arguing that this country imposes sanctions without plans ever to lift them in order to punish, rather than to deter or change behaviour. Let me ask Ministers what I would ask of any sanctions regime: what must change for these measures to be lifted, and will that be published and made clear so that they can achieve the effect they wish to see? Turning to the Palestinian elections, there is a real possibility that Hamas could win a share of power. If Hamas win the Palestinian elections, will the Government give diplomatic accreditation to one of their representatives as ambassador? We must all speak honestly and accept that the odds are stacked against any Palestinian moderate while Tehran funds, arms and outbids all of them. A Hamas election victory could mark the first time the British Government accredit an ambassador appointed by a proscribed terrorist group. Will the Minister confirm in winding up that under no circumstances will the Government accept a Palestinian ambassador drawn from Hamas? I also ask for a written ministerial statement before 6 November setting out the accreditation criteria. The Iranian state continues to support Hamas to use violence to advance its political aims. It is therefore vital that the Palestinian Authority security forces can maintain the peace needed for an election to take place, so it is deeply regrettable that, following the Foreign Secretary’s statement last week, the UK training advisory mission to Palestinian security forces has been terminated when it is most needed. What efforts have the Government made to replace our contribution, be it with Jordanian or EU or other authorities and forces? Likewise, the closure of our consulate in Jerusalem severs our main diplomatic channel to Palestinians in Jerusalem and the west bank when the situation is getting worse and the west bank should occupy more of our debate in this place. The Jordanians are doing an important job to protect the stability that there is, but Christian communities, among the oldest in the world, are being harassed, attacked and driven from their homes. How are the Government now going to assess the situation there and speak up for those being persecuted? The Minister responded just now to a question from his Back Benches about the strike on the World Central Kitchen. James Henderson, John Chapman and James Kirby, three British veterans, were killed by Israeli fire while delivering food in Gaza. Their families are still waiting for the unedited drone footage to be handed to the coroner and for a resumption date for the inquest. Can the Minister give more clarity on what the Government are doing to secure that footage and that date, and on when we will get answers about how, in January 2024, an Israeli airstrike hit a residential compound in a designated safe zone in Gaza where British surgeons working for Medical Aid for Palestinians were living? Thankfully, none were harmed. This conflict sits within a wider regional destabilisation that threatens us all. It is indisputable that the Iranian regime is by far the biggest sponsor of global terrorism, and Iran must never achieve its goal of nuclear armament, because a nuclear-armed ayatollah is concerning enough, but who among us can truly say that we trust that that regime would not share such a weapon with the Houthis or with Hezbollah? We would be one step from nuclear-enabled terrorism. Just last week, the Houthis briefly captured the pivotal Perim island in the Bab el-Mandeb strait. Although Yemeni Government forces repelled the attack, that must serve as a warning. Taken with the Houthi strike against the Saudi east-west oil pipeline, there is a real and escalating risk that Bab el-Mandeb will, like the strait of Hormuz, come to be closed. If the situation at both does not calm, the coming winter will be marked by rising inflation, economic hardship, medicine and food shortages, an energy crisis and worse. Given that, we must counter the Houthi threat and assist Saudi Arabia and other partners in maintaining maritime freedom. The previous Prime Minister did at least work earnestly to establish an international coalition aimed at protecting the flow of trade. The Prime Minister now needs to convene this group, otherwise he will walk into a winter of discontent. The British people need him to take action. What contingency plans have been drawn up if the Houthi campaign continues and the Bab el-Mandeb strait and Saudi pipeline infrastructure are degraded? Given this context, the choice to delay the decision on the Jackdaw gas field in the North sea is mistaken. We must not put our heads in the sand, because the reality is that next year we may find ourselves in a three-theatre conflict: Ukraine; the strait of Hormuz; and—which would be the greatest shock to the global economy and the cost of living in my lifetime—Taiwan. We must be prepared. Britain did not choose this conflict, and we cannot choose to be unaffected by it, but Government action is needed to protect our economy, our supply chains and our people, because Iran and its proxies continue to target us directly, feeding and funding a national emergency of antisemitism in our country, and working to undermine our freedoms and security. Just last week, another two individuals were arrested on suspicion of assisting Iranian intelligence; that takes the total to 15 in the last two years. The Government must also take action to shut down blatant propaganda operations on our streets: Al Masirah, the Houthis’ main television station; LuaLua TV, which has an Ofcom broadcasting licence; and the Islamic Centre of England in Maida Vale, whose director has to be appointed by the ayatollah himself. There are various cut-outs across our country currently sponsoring visas and giving terrorists not a back door but a front door into our country, and we must end this game of whack-a-mole and unplug the machine. That means we must designate Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security. It is in our interests to see a lasting peace in Israel and Palestine, and indeed across the whole region. We have an historical obligation not to look the other way, and the suffering of 7 October, Gaza and the west bank pain us all. The consequences of that day continue to reverberate and grow ever more pressing for us. We hope for the best and there are small glimmers of hope, but action is needed to protect us here in the UK by assuring and shoring up our interests in the region. So let us prepare for the worst and ensure that, if it comes, we have the means, the will and the vision to weather the storm.

I will confine my remarks to the subject of Israel and Palestine, and I declare my interest as co-chair of the all-party group on Britain-Palestine. I very much welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement of 8 September, and particularly the Government having now made it clear that their official position is that Israel’s occupation of Palestine is unlawful—it is illegal. That is an important change, and it at long last brings the United Kingdom into line with the International Court of Justice 2024 advisory opinion, but, as the Minister said, the court’s conclusion was rooted in Israel’s entrenchment of its control, its clear intention to extend permanent sovereignty, and its expansionist settlement agenda. It is also welcome that the Foreign Secretary acknowledged the increasing evidence identified by bodies, including the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry, that war crimes appear to have been committed in Gaza, and we support the appropriate legal processes to establish responsibility for those crimes. On genocide, I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s commitment to full, robust and fair judicial processes, with final determinations made by competent courts, but the UK does not need to wait for a final determination before acting. The UN commission of inquiry stated in September 2025 that Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and that state parties to the genocide convention had been on notice of a serious risk of genocide since at least January 2024. That serious risk itself triggers a duty to prevent genocide. The UK must therefore recognise that risk and act now: ending political, financial and military support that contributes to it; sanctioning those most implicated; committing to execute International Criminal Court arrest warrants; and supporting South Africa’s case at the ICJ. I welcome the Government’s commitment to refuse arms licences where exports materially contribute to the unlawful occupation, but the Foreign Secretary did not clearly confirm when I asked during last week’s statement whether existing licences will be cancelled where they meet that test. Will the Minister confirm that the new double lock will apply to existing licences, and set out the criteria by which the Government will determine whether an export contributes to the occupation? Colleagues will wish to know whether British arms exports currently available for the IDF in the west bank will no longer be licensed. I welcome the proposed sanctions on goods and services linked to illegal settlements I very much welcome that in the context of the previous ridiculous position of properties being marketed in this city for sale in the west bank. When that was raised, the wholly inappropriate response was to send in the Advertising Standards Authority, so I welcome the movement on that by Front Benchers. Will the Government confirm that these measures will cover all settlements, including existing settlements, that the ban on goods will apply to exports as well as imports, and that there will be no “re-export to settlements” clauses in contracts, as modelled on the guidance issued in respect of Russia? Finally, I sincerely hope that this reset will be furthered and sustained, as only by doing so can the commitment to a two-state solution be truly achieved.

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

I welcome the Minister to his place. I look forward to working with him and I pay tribute to the work of his predecessor, who was called to the Chamber to discuss this issue many times. I also pay tribute to the consulate general in East Jerusalem, which I visited with a Select Committee, that did some truly fantastic work. I regret that it has been closed and I hope that it will be reopened swiftly. The Liberal Democrats welcomed the Foreign Secretary’s statement last week designed to protect the two-state solution and the territorial integrity of the Palestinian state, that finally brought forward a ban on trade in goods and services with the illegal Israeli settlements. This was long overdue and the Liberal Democrats have called for it for years. Many of my constituents in Esher and Walton have also called for it, as did members of my Jewish community, some of whom have been campaigning for it. The Government must now ensure this ban is comprehensive and rigorously enforced, leaving no room for doubt as to the legal consequences for businesses involved in supporting or sustaining illegal settlements, and it must be enforced urgently. The Government must outline how they will monitor and implement this ban, and commit to ensuring that the burden of proof is placed on Israeli authorities to provide verifiable certification that imported goods originated within the internationally recognised pre-1967 “green-line” borders, denying UK entry to any uncertified items originating from those illegal settlements. The Government should draw on the legal provisions set out in schedule 1 to the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 to ensure that the ban on services is comprehensive, and they should introduce secondary legislation to amend SAMLA, placing a legal duty of due diligence on UK banks and financial institutions to verify that none of their direct operations, supply chains or customers is financing the purchase, construction or other service provision for illegal settlements. We would like the Government to outline that any violation of these bans would result in enforcement measures under the UK-Israel trade and partnership agreement. We call on the Government to impose a comprehensive ban on all arms exports to Israel, including the sale of F-35 components, and to expand sanctions on Ministers in the Israeli Government’s security cabinet who are encouraging settlement expansion, including Prime Minister Netanyahu himself. A two-state solution represents the only political settlement that can deliver peace, dignity and security for Israelis and Palestinians alike. But Hamas, as a brutal terror organisation that threatens the survival of the state of Israel, can have no role in the future of Palestine. The UK, together with international partners, must develop a plan to progress urgently the disarming and disbanding of this terror group. Preserving the territory of Palestine must be a foundation stone for the building of the Palestinian state, but another must be the strengthening of the governance capabilities of the Palestinian Authority. There are vital reforms that must take place within the Palestinian Authority to ensure that they can act as an effective state-building force. These must include strengthening the rule of law and protections for freedom of expression, cracking down on corruption and following through on ending the operation of the martyrs fund. The Government must support and hold the PA to account for the implementation of these reforms. It is critical that the upcoming Palestinian elections are free, fair and open to advance further democratic reform across Palestine, so will Ministers work with President Abbas and the Palestinian Authority to help deliver these, including ensuring access for international election monitors. We must also recognise that current Israeli restrictions are contributing to severe economic insecurity in the west bank. The Government must put pressure on the Israeli Cabinet to ensure that the Palestinian Authority have the revenues to which they are entitled and access to banking systems to support the economy. The Israeli legislative elections in October are an opportunity to deliver a new vision for the country that reverses illegal settlement growth, prioritises diplomacy over territorial expansion and champions engagement with moderate partners in Palestine to deliver a better future for both communities. If the cycle of violence continues, it will only strengthen the voices of extremists on both sides who reject co-existence between Israelis and Palestinians. Meanwhile, the UK Government must use all the leverage they can, working with international partners and with the Israeli Government to stop the loss of civilian life in Gaza even after the ceasefire.

The UK Government need to work with all their partners, but the reality is that unless America takes action, Israel is not going to back off from the atrocities it is carrying out. We need to push all the levers available to us to make sure that America is on side. The United Nations Security Council resolutions were almost all vetoed by America on its own. Unless America gets behind this peace plan, there will be no peace in Palestine or Israel.

The hon. Member is absolutely right that America has a critical role to play in this conflict. To give some numbers, as of 6 August, at least 300 children have reportedly been killed in Gaza in the 300 days since the ceasefire was announced—an average of one child a day. Gazans continue to remain in the grip of a man-made humanitarian catastrophe in the strip. The UK Government must do more to alleviate the humanitarian crises there and the one growing in the west bank. Over 2 million people in Gaza are living on around 30% of the territory, sheltering in unsafe conditions among destroyed buildings, rubble and waste. Some 70% of Gaza remains under IDF control. The UK must now apply genuine pressure to Netanyahu’s Government to ensure that food, aid, medical supplies and other essentials can reach Gazans now, without impediment and under the auspices of the UN, and that children and all civilians are protected. I have called on UK Ministers to pressure Netanyahu’s Government to lift their arbitrary restrictions on non-governmental organisations supplying humanitarian aid to the strip. Last week, I noted in this Chamber that more than 1.4 million people in Gaza are acutely food insecure, yet Israel’s current interpretation of dual-use restrictions means that Palestinians are routinely and systematically denied essential items, including those needed for rehabilitation by the tens of thousands of people who have suffered life-changing injuries during this conflict. The Foreign Secretary agreed that blocking those goods was appalling and seemed to suggest that it was a strategy. What does the Minister think is the strategy of the Israeli Government? Will he put pressure on them to undo those dual-good restrictions to allow the Palestinians to be self-sufficient, and to ensure that aid is sustainable and that they are no longer expected to live hand to mouth? From October, the World Food Programme will cut the number of people it can feed in Gaza from 1.1 million to 600,000—not because the need has reduced, but because the money has run out. Those are people who will go without food, in a territory where 100,000 women and children are already expected to need treatment for malnutrition in the coming year. The UK is the ninth-largest donor to World Food Programme operations in Palestine, behind the USA, Germany and France. Our annual contribution fell from $18 million in 2024 to $9.3 million last year, and to just $4 million this year. That is a reduction of 78%. The Government cannot truly speak of their commitment to the Palestinian people while presiding over cuts like those. Will the Minister explain how those two things are reconcilable? The brutal cuts to our aid budget have meant that our response to all humanitarian crises is limited. I have asked many Ministers in this House when we should expect at the very least a road map for restoring the 0.7% aid budget—a commitment that we in this House have enshrined in law. Again, can the Minister set out that timeline? Can he confirm that his party—the party of the Department for International Development and making poverty history—is committed to seeing our aid budget returned in full?

The hon. Member is making a very strong point about the lack of food security for the Palestinian people in Gaza. Does she recognise that Israel now occupies around 70% of Gaza, so the population is restricted to 30% of the area? Some years ago, there was a huge move to make Gaza once again a major food-growing area, which traditionally it always had been. Does she think that should be part of the development process again?

I 100% agree. I made the point last week that the dual-use restrictions mean that people can bring an egg into Gaza, but not a chicken; and a potato, but not a potato tuber. That means Gazans are living hand to mouth and are absolutely reliant on the Israeli state for their wellbeing and health. The Government must engage with international partners and the Israeli authorities to ensure that journalists and human rights investigators are allowed into the strip. That is essential for accountability for war crimes on both sides of the conflict. We believe that robustly challenging the illegal actions of this extremist Israeli Government is compatible both with staunch support for the rights of the states of Israel and Palestine to exist and with resolute support for the rights of British Jews to live free from the scourge of anti-Jewish hatred. Antisemitism has no place in our society. We stand in solidarity with the Jewish community and all those affected, and we reaffirm our commitment to tackling hatred in all its forms. Those who spread antisemitic hatred or incite violence against Jews—whether online, at marches or elsewhere—must be stopped. It is never acceptable. Lastly, this is a debate on Israel and Palestine, but any serious discussion of the situation must also consider the situation in Lebanon. In Lebanon, more than 350,000 people remain displaced, and more than 1,200 civilians have been killed in the latest phase of fighting, including children and health workers. Israel has reportedly seized and occupied 230 square miles of Lebanese territory, creating a yellow line restricted zone similar to that in Gaza. The Israeli Government must cease their military operations in southern Lebanon and withdraw from the country.

On the point about the people displaced in Lebanon, does the hon. Member agree that if there is to be a comprehensive peace settlement between Israel and Palestine, all 700,000-odd people who were forcibly expelled from the west bank, from Gaza and from elsewhere during the Nakba must be allowed to return? At the moment they are all in refugee camps in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt.

I agree. We must stand with the refugees emanating from this crisis in their plight, including with the countries that are supporting them, such as Jordan. We must ensure that our commitment to those countries is secure, including our financial commitment. Israel’s continuing occupation violates Lebanon’s sovereignty and is exacerbating the humanitarian crisis, which we have just spoken of. This House must recognise and reaffirm that Hezbollah is a brutal terror organisation from which the Israeli Government have the right to defend themselves and their people. It must be disarmed, but that must be achieved by working with leaders in Beirut and through international organisations. Will the Minister set out what role the UK is playing in pushing for a proper ceasefire in Lebanon and for the disarmament of Hezbollah? Will he confirm that Israel must withdraw from all sovereign Lebanese territory? Progress has been made in this last week that we on the Liberal Democrat Benches have long called for, but we must be certain that statements are followed up with robust action and that we stand up as the UK, as we always must, for international law, for international humanitarian law and for peace.

I begin by acknowledging and welcoming the hugely important step announced by the Foreign Secretary and reaffirmed by the Minister today. The ban on imports of settlement goods and the powers to target those who support, facilitate or profit from settlement activity, and the conclusion in line with the ICJ’s substantial ruling that Israel’s continued occupation of Palestine is unlawful, is a hugely welcome step taken by this Government. Equally important is the fact that the Government have made clear the complete reset in our relationship. That is very important, but we must be clear that any reset must mean more than just a change in language; it must mean serious consequences for those who flagrantly breach international law.

I agree with my hon. Friend that it is very good that we heard from the Government last week that they recognise that Israel’s occupation is unlawful. Does he agree that, given that it is unlawful, it is absolutely vital that it is the Palestinian people, but also the international community in the widest sense, who get to set what happens in the future in the territories of Palestine, rather than it being solely Israel’s responsibility, which is the view of Israel?

My hon. Friend makes an important point, and it is the point that I am making. I will come on to the international rules-based order shortly, and that will perhaps answer his very important question. Many of us in this House have been calling for these measures for years. Let us be honest: many of us have stood here in debate after debate, speaking about these very issues, only to be told by Ministers time and again that they are reviewing what action to take or looking at the ICJ advisory opinion. While we were having those debates in this House and deliberating, the Palestinians did not have the luxury of waiting. Frankly, it has taken a change of Government to get us to this place.