What Britain's parties say and do in public, recorded from the source.
Every entry links to Hansard, Parliament, the Electoral Commission or the party's own channel. Every party is tracked by the same rules. Methodology
Labour Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Conservative and Unionist Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Liberal Democrats
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Reform UK
Latest entry 6 Nov 2026
Scottish National Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Green Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Plaid Cymru
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
12,832 spoken contributions under 12 words (interjections such as “Will the hon. Member give way?”) are hidden. Show them
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The world’s eyes have rightly been on the crisis in Gaza. The world’s eyes have to be on that crisis and also on the appalling settler terrorism we are seeing in the west bank. I talked about it in my statement, but the fact that a former Israeli Prime Minister described it as ethnic cleansing should give people—not just in this House, but in Israel—proper pause about what is actually happening.
Like all our sanctions regimes, fines and action will be taken against companies that breach them. We are widely known across the world for the strength of our sanctions regime. It is really important to underline the point that, by using the SAMLA powers, these will be tough sanctions, and it will be absolutely clear that there will be penalties for breaching them.
Obviously, those comments are absurd and wrong. The Falkland Islands are British and will remain so because that is what the islanders want. Those comments show a complete lack of understanding and comprehension of the injustice and unlawfulness that is going on in relation to the occupied territories, because it is an occupation against the will of the people there. The Falkland Islands are British, as I say, because that is what the Falkland Islanders want.
That will be the responsibility of British businesses and other businesses that want to import into this country. I want to underline this point. That is the point of the sanctions regime we are bringing in. Just to develop the point a bit more, it is likely to be based on the postcodes of where the settlements are. Companies will have to say that the goods they are bringing in do not come from those areas.
I thank my hon. Friend for his contribution. I also thank him for the conversations we have had in the run-up to the statement; they have been important. I will say a couple of things. We absolutely oppose the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement against Israel. This is about settlements in the occupied territories. In answer to the question from the right hon. Member for North West Hampshire (Kit Malthouse) on why this will take six to nine months, it is precisely to get the regime right so that it does not affect or impinge on green-line Israel.
The hon. Lady raises a very, very important case, and I am glad that she has done. I am happy to look at it and will endeavour to do everything I can to make a difference.
My hon. Friend has been an incredibly powerful advocate on the issue for a long period of time, and I welcome her words. She is absolutely right: I am afraid that inaction is simply abdicating our responsibilities for what we see happening before our eyes, and what has been eloquently described by Members on both sides of this House. That is why we have taken this action, which is designed to make a difference and help to save the two-state solution.
I regret the tone of the hon. Gentleman’s question, honestly. He needs to take a sober look at what has happened in relation to Israel and Palestine, and what is happening in Gaza and the west bank. From Members on his own side, as well as across the House, he has heard the huge injustices eloquently described. My view is that we need to be tackling injustice across the world, but we cannot ignore the centrality of Israel and Palestine—both our historic relationship with Israel and our responsibilities, and the suffering of the Palestinian people. Frankly, in terms of our geopolitical interests, we will never have stability in the middle east without a two-state solution. For all those reasons, it is right that we act.
I think the answer to my hon. Friend’s question is no. I want to correct him on one thing: these are not anti-Israel policies. This is about the occupied territories, which we as a Government, along with the ICJ, have found were unlawfully occupied—it is really important to say that. Once we decide that it is an unlawful occupation, I do believe that, as a matter of principle and morality, then other things follow about the economic relationships that we choose to have.
I thank the hon. Member for her kind words, and for her kind words behind the Chamber as we were coming in; they meant a lot to me. I want to do this as quickly as possible. Six to nine months is what I said in the statement, but if we can do it quicker, we will. We want to get this step right, because it is important that it actually makes a difference. It is also important to say—because it is, in a sense, the thing that will have got less attention today—that our extension of the global human rights regime to international humanitarian law violations will also help us to take action even more swiftly.
I thank my hon. Friend for the conversation we had earlier. He raises such an important issue about the healthcare crisis in Gaza. The answer is that we want to do as much as we can as a country, and as much as we can working with others. I spoke to the Jordanian Foreign Minister on Sunday about an event that we are going to hold at the UN General Assembly, and one of the things that we both agreed on was that we want to move things forward and make a difference. I absolutely promise my hon. Friend that that is what we will endeavour to do.
I want to see Israel withdraw from Gaza and I want to see Hamas disarm. That is the whole point of the 20-point plan—I agree with the right hon. Member on that. Campaigners on the issue have played an important role. The way in which young people and people across the country—not just in Britain but across the world—have been mobilised on this issue should tell all of us in this House something about the deep sense of injustice that people feel about what has unfolded. On the right hon. Member’s point about intelligence—I want to be careful on this—we are not, in any sense, helping with the occupation, but we have important and valued intelligence and security relationships with Israel.
My hon. Friend raises an important point. As I talked about in my statement, through investment we have made a difference to the security of Jewish people across Britain. In a sense, we all have a responsibility on this issue, not just as politicians but as a society. I re-emphasise what I said in my statement, because it is so important: no British Jew should be held responsible for the actions of the Israeli Government. All of us—I really urge this of all Members—have a responsibility to transmit that message to the public, because whether through a combination of prejudice or ignorance, I am afraid that people often do not understand that lesson, and it leads to terrible antisemitism.
We will look at all these issues as part of our sanctions regime. It is important to protect trade with green-line Israel and financial services within it as well, and that is why we want to be careful with this sanctions regime. On the first part of the hon. Lady’s remarks, I thank her for what she said. I do feel a sense of humility. If I could just add this, Madam Deputy Speaker: as some in this House will know, my late mother, who died a few months ago, was a big campaigner on these issues, and I have thought quite a lot in this process about what she might be saying on these issues.
I have set out our plans today; this is what we are going to do. My hon. Friend speaks with great eloquence on these questions. We have to decide what is in our national interest and what is the right thing for Britain, based on our values.
If I may say so, I do not think that is a very responsible way of talking about these issues. The hon. Gentleman is welcome to disagree with our actions, as I think the right hon. Member for Tonbridge (Tom Tugendhat) did, but I do not think he should be talking in this way. I could not have been clearer in my statement that no British Jew is responsible for the policies of the Israeli Government, and it behoves us all, whichever side of this debate we are on, to ensure that there can be no confusion about that question. I am afraid his question fell afoul of that.
I will answer briefly, Madam Deputy Speaker. We will get on with the process now of making the statutory instrument happen. I just want to pick up on my hon. Friend’s earlier point. On the day the new Prime Minister was sworn in, I happened to meet a young man—he was 17 or so—who had been at school in the UK, and he spoke to me about the antisemitism he had faced since the age of 11 at his secondary school. All of us in this House need to take so seriously the everyday experiences of British Jews, which sees antisemitism not just in schools but elsewhere. We all have a responsibility to tackle that.
As I said earlier, when we impose sanctions on specific companies or entities, we do not say who they are in advance. However, I do not think I could have been clearer about the intent here; as I said in my statement, we do not want British companies being involved in the financing, construction or infrastructure of settlement expansion. That will be the purpose of the regime when it comes to services, and that is what we will make happen.
Well, that was worth my hon. Friend getting some extra time—thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. My hon. Friend raises a really important issue around education, and an important issue around the safety of Jewish children going to school in the UK. We will take forward both of those issues.
The hon. Lady’s statement is a complete travesty. This Government are taking action. We are taking action on goods and on services, and we have banned arms licences for the IDF in Gaza. We have taken action across the board. We have declared the occupation unlawful. Her statement might have been designed for TikTok, but it really does not become her.
My hon. Friend speaks with great expertise on these issues, and she is absolutely right. We are going to act in our national interest on the basis of our values. That is not just our right but our duty as a country.
I am glad that the hon. Lady asked that question. She is absolutely right, and I can answer with an emphatic yes.
I thank my hon. Friend for her question; she is absolutely right about the question of access. Across the board, politicians and others are being denied access to see what is going on for themselves. That should make one extremely sceptical and fearful, frankly, of what is happening on the ground.
I do not accept any of what the right hon. Gentleman said. I have known him a long time, so I say this to him: how dare he try to speak for the Palestinian people instead of the Palestinian Prime Minister or the Palestinian ambassador in the UK? Why does he not meet the Palestinian ambassador in the UK and hear from him?
We will keep looking at what we can do for students and others from Gaza. My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise that. He makes a fundamental point: the ICJ has made its statement on legality, and we have taken a view on legality. People can accept that or not, but if we accept it, how can we possibly defend a continued and unchanged economic relationships with the occupied territories?
We have already sanctioned two Israeli Ministers who did that, but we always keep our sanctions regime under review. The hon. Gentleman makes a profoundly important point about the everyday intimidation that Palestinians on the west bank face—not just this year or under this Government but under previous Governments. It has been an endless amount of intimidation, and I saw it and heard from people about it in 2014 when I was there. Frankly, it is totally indefensible.
I think they have a slightly different regime, but I am in touch with my Dutch colleague and will definitely ask him if we can do it more quickly.
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind remarks. I believe in accountability for war crimes. That is what the international courts are for.
My hon. Friend has campaigned on these issues for a long time. He is absolutely right about the importance of both accountability and international law. We will be guided by it.
We want to do everything we can to help Palestinian children in Gaza and the west bank. The best thing we can do is get a two-state solution without the intimidation, threats, death and destruction that so many Palestinian children have faced. I take this opportunity to congratulate the children at the school in the hon. Gentleman’s constituency on being moved by this issue and advocating on it.
We do not comment on intelligence and security matters, but I can honestly assure my hon. Friend that we are not involved in the occupation or actions in Gaza and the west bank. That is not the nature of our intelligence and security co-operation with Israel.
I say bluntly to the hon. Member that we should have acted earlier. It has taken the new Prime Minister to come in and recognise the gravity of the situation and the degree of public concern on these questions. We concur with the ICJ’s conclusions on the unlawfulness of the occupation and we will ensure that we abide by what that implies.
I feel moved by what my hon. Friend has asked. I really thank her for the work that she has been doing. As I thought long and hard about the statement and some of the words I used—one has to weigh one’s words carefully—I thought precisely that those people who are under, for example, settler terrorism and the attempts at ethnic cleansing deserve at least the truth to be told about what they are facing. So, absolutely, this is in part an expression of solidarity with the people my hon. Friend talks about.
Let me deal with those two issues. First, one thing that I said in my statement was that the declaration on the occupation means we will now look at all arms licences to see whether they materially contribute to the occupation; if they do, they will not be allowed. Secondly, part of the point of a sanctions regime is proper enforcement, and we will do that.
I can assure my hon. Friend on his last point: all licences that materially contribute to the occupation will not be allowed. That is why we now have a double lock in relation not only to Gaza but to the occupation. On the speed of action, we want to move as speedily as we can with these measures.
I undertake to work with Members across the House on these questions; more unites us than divides us on them, and we do need to act. I say to the hon. Member and others in the House that part of acting is upholding Israel’s right to exist and its security, which includes opposing BDS, because part of being faithful to a two-state solution is upholding the rights of the Palestinian people and the Israeli people.
My hon. Friend is right: this is a heartbreaking emergency both in the west bank and in Gaza. Part of the advocacy and the work we now want to do, including at UNGA, is about moving forward on those questions and making a difference both in Gaza and in the west bank.
I will not answer every point that the hon. Member made. We have announced a comprehensive set of measures today. I say to him—I want to be careful in what I say—that it is very important that, as I said in my statement, our action against the occupied territories cannot be about the erasure of Israel. It is important that all of us in the House respect the role of Israel as a homeland for the Jewish people and protect its security as part of our commitment to a two-state solution.
Absolutely; this must be a campaign for us all. It is about government, but truthfully it is also about us as a society—in fact, it is even more about us as a society, because the Government can do their bit, but it is about what each of us as individuals do to counter antisemitism.
We believe that trade with green-line Israel is important. We value it and we do not believe that it should be ended. It is so important in this House that we make the distinction between the occupied territories and green-line Israel.