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 10 Nov 2026
Conservative and Unionist Party
Latest entry 10 Nov 2026
Liberal Democrats
Latest entry 10 Nov 2026
Reform UK
Latest entry 10 Nov 2026
Scottish National Party
Latest entry 10 Nov 2026
Green Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Plaid Cymru
Latest entry 10 Nov 2026
Showing every spoken contribution, including 12,868 under 12 words. Hide short remarks
The Foreign Secretary, other Ministers in the Government and I discuss those questions with the American Administration. It is obvious, as the President of the United States has said, that the Israeli Government are alienating even some of their closest allies through their conduct, both on the west bank and in Gaza.
As I said, questions of justice and accountability are foremost in our mind. We raise them with the Israeli Government regularly, particularly in relation to cases that involve British nationals. We are still awaiting justice and accountability for the World Central Kitchen incident, which killed a number of British aid workers. I know of so many stories like the one my hon. Friend refers to. I remember visiting Ramallah before I was a Minister; children had been killed on the streets as we drove in to see the Palestinian Authority. There are far, far too many such cases, and we continue to make that point with force, both to the Israelis and in multilateral settings.
For obvious reasons, I will not disclose the full details of diplomatic talks, but I am sure the hon. Gentleman can see the number of things that we have done jointly, including the E1 statement that I referred to last month. We think we have more impact and influence when we work in concert with our friends, and that is what we will always seek to do.
It gives me no particular pleasure to be talking about the fourth round of sanctions. One would wish that diplomatic activity could have been enough to prevent the kind of incidents that so many Members are talking about this afternoon, but while they continue, so will we.
I gently disagree. I feel that there is some force in what the right hon. Gentleman says about insanity being doing the same thing again and again. We have had many exchanges of that nature. Over the course of two years, the British Government have taken a whole range of steps. We have talked about recognition and sanctions—
Returning to the question about the consequences for the Israeli Government, we could not have been clearer, alongside 11 other world leaders, about what they would look like. I say gently to the right hon. Gentleman that the range of actions taken by the Government that I am a part of was absolutely unthinkable to him when he was sitting on the Government Benches. Recognition, suspension of—[Interruption.] We have done it; you did not.
I have set out as clearly as I can our position on the E1 settlement. I have also been clear that no one should be profiting from unlawfully seized land.
I gently push back on the suggestion that what we do has no consequences. I have been pleased to see, as I said to the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, that other partners and allies have taken the actions that we have. There are consequences for Israel, in terms of its position in the world, when it alienates as many of its friends and allies as it has. We have set out as clearly as we can, both for companies and for the Israeli Government, what our views on the E1 settlement are. We did that at head-of-Government level last month. That statement has been seen widely around the world. I cannot guarantee to this House that people will take heed of the statement, but we have set out our position in exactly the way that the hon. Gentleman requests.
I will not speak for the American Government; they have set out their position on their concerns about annexation quite clearly. We have discussed throughout this afternoon just how significant the E1 development would be, and I think that that is understood in Washington DC.
I thank the right hon. Gentleman, my predecessor, for his question, and for the opportunity to comment on antisemitism. Before I do, I just want to say that this is a delicate period in Israeli politics. I hope the result of the Israeli election will be a set of Israeli policies that are much closer to the wishes of this House. He is, of course, right to say that my ability to influence developments on the ground is finite—if it were not, we would not be in this situation—but we will continue to use all our leverage to try to ensure change. During this period, we can perhaps hope that the Israeli political process will deliver results more akin to a policy that this House would like to see.
We have, and we will.
I do not think the policy of settlements is supported across the whole of Israel. That is very clear in the discussions about the coming elections. There are many voices in Israel who recognise the terrible harm being done to the state of Israel by the expansion of settlements. I hope you will forgive me, Madam Deputy Speaker, if I come back to the point about antisemitism. We must be really careful in our language. There are many, many Israelis—and indeed many, many British Jews—who can see the terrible damage being done by violent settlement, and we must not tar communities in this country or the whole nation of Israel with the same brush. I am grateful for the opportunity to return to the point raised by the right hon. Member for South West Wiltshire (Dr Murrison).
I do agree, and I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s work. I know he has been an active voice on these questions and that he sought to visit Israel to engage with those progressive voices. More fool Israel that it did not allow him in.
I will, and I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his courteous words.
My hon. Friend has been a doughty advocate on these questions for many years, and I was pleased to join her to meet students from Gaza earlier this week. We will take steps to ensure that the UK is not in any way involved. Legitimate trade with green line Israel is, of course, permissible, but when businesses in this country trade with the occupied territories and seek to make a profit from land that has been unlawfully procured, we will take action.
I thank the hon. Lady for the question. I can reassure her that I am very conscious of the electoral timeline and the rumoured timeline for the tenders as well. That is one reason we have set out the statements that we have on the timeline that we have.
I have set out the statement we made last year and the intensity of focus we have on these issues. I wrote to the Advertising Standards Authority following concerns raised in many places, including in this House, about an event some weeks ago, and have indeed engaged with the Charity Commission following concerns being raised.
The hon. Lady is right: we have had many exchanges across the Dispatch Box. I gently remind her that over the course of these exchanges, I have recognised the Palestinian state; I have sanctioned Israeli Ministers; we have restricted arms sales; and we have led statements repeatedly on these issues. I understand that we are all appalled by the violence that continues, but that does not mean we are not taking the action that we can—
And no doubt you can set out your own proposals. We have taken repeated actions and will continue to do so.
Madam Deputy Speaker, let me beg your forgiveness for forgetting the customs of the House—you would think that practice would make perfect. I thank my hon. Friend for the question. All of us, particularly in election year, need to be reminding all our friends in Israel and all the politicians of the importance of the points that he makes.
I have tried to be as explicit as I can be about the potential consequences, while abiding to the long-standing position on sanctions.
The statement was signed by 11 countries. We all have different arrangements and different tools at our disposal. The British Government’s position is that we oppose any involvement of any kind in the E1 settlement. Given the magnitude of the consequences of the E1 settlement, we would consider that in a broad way, not a narrow way.
It is obviously not appropriate for me to set out who should win an election in a fellow democracy. What I can set out is British Government policy and what we would wish to see from Israel. We have been very clear over an incredibly long period of time about our views on a two-state solution, about the conduct of the war in Gaza. It is not for us to set out who should win the Israeli election. It is perfectly reasonable for us to set out what we would wish the policy of the Israeli Government to be in relation to these questions after October.
I thank my hon. Friend for the question, and I know that she has been a doughty supporter of some of the Gaza students who were relocated to her constituency. She is right to raise the financial pressure that the Palestinian Authority—and the whole of the economy of Palestine—are under as a result of this dispute about correspondent banking. We have raised this repeatedly and will continue to do so. The economic viability of Palestine is vital.
I am pleased to confirm to the House that the unit was not closed—it was moved. The function remains within the Foreign Office and we still receive assessments. There has been some reorganisation within the Department—I was surprised that excited as much interest as it did—but I can confirm that the function remains and the unit was not closed.
I do not think I can go further in response to my hon. Friend than I have already. We have been clear at the highest possible level, in the voice of our Prime Minister, about the seriousness with which we take this issue, the breadth of concern that we have and the consequences that are likely to follow. I cannot spell out those consequences for reasons I have already alluded to, but I reassure him that we treat this with the seriousness that it deserves.
I have spoken myself to schoolgirls impeded in their day-to-day lives. We have taken four waves of sanctions sanctions against settlers, recognising the severity of the situation, and I have been clear that while the situation continues to get worse, we will continue to act.
Goods produced in illegal settlements should not be traded with the United Kingdom. We distinguish them clearly from goods produced in green line Israel. I have said repeatedly that no one should benefit from a profit made on land that has been unlawfully procured.
The hon. Gentleman makes an important point and raises a concern that many across the House have raised about the huge disruption to long-standing agricultural practices caused by the expansion of settlements.
My hon. Friend asks me about the use of the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018. That is obviously the basis on which all the Foreign Office sanctions are made. For the reasons that I have set out, I will not say anything further about sanctions from the Dispatch Box. We have done four waves and we have been clear today, as we were last month. In relation to the expo he refers to, I can clarify that it is legitimate to sell real estate within green line Israel in the UK and to advertise that, but it is not legitimate to advertise illegal settlements. That is why I wrote to the Advertising Standards Authority following that expo.
I hesitate to commit the Government to primary legislation. The Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act has been sufficient for the four waves so far, but I have heard my hon. Friend’s important points.
I thank my hon. Friend for his commitment to these issues. I know that the people of Uxbridge have raised them with him many times and he has not failed to reflect that to me. We are taking actions in the way that I have set out, and I expressed the range of concern that we have about financing for the settlements in my answer to my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds).
I agree with my hon. Friend about the response of the Opposition. This is a particularly critical year. It is critical for us all to engage with the full breadth of Israeli politics and society to encourage Israelis, alongside our allies, that there is a better way for the state of Israel and the state of Palestine, and that will be a focus until that election.
We will do everything we can. I have set out some of the steps taken so far, and I will not hesitate to return to this House as and when required.
We consider those settlements to be illegal, and we are clear with the Israeli Government that that is our position.
That was one of the reasons why we set out even clearer business guidance to our own businesses, and I am sure that many others will have taken notice.
It is important to say that at the moment, the E1 is going through a tendering process. There are not yet spades in the ground, but that is what we must seek to avert. That will be a focus of our diplomacy, as it has been since the most recent announcements by Prime Minister Netanyahu in September 2025 of his intention to go ahead. As many Members have said over the course of this afternoon, we have a window before October, and we intend to use it.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. I thank the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) for securing this debate on an issue that concerns those in my constituency. The south Essex coastline is one of my constituency’s greatest assets—beloved by residents, depended upon by our fishing community and a magnet for the more than 7 million day visitors who flock to Southend alone each year. But as beautiful as our coastline is, it can also be treacherous, from unpredictable tides to shifting mudflats. Protection from physical danger requires specialised skills, a rapid response and a deep local knowledge. The Southend-on-Sea coastguard rescue team covers roughly 70 miles of coastline, and its 11 volunteers are the reason why our community can safely enjoy locations such as Shoeburyness’s east beach, the marshes of Wallasea island and, of course, Southend pier. Rescue officers, those who—
Q6. The Donna Ockenden and Baroness Amos reviews have exposed some uncomfortable truths: that justice is not brought about by a system, a law, a protocol, a regulatory authority or NHS England, but by bereaved and harmed families having to speak up, over and over again, about the most horrific and traumatic experience of their lives just to be heard. Does the Prime Minister agree that the system is not only failing but cruel, and if we are to restore public trust then we must finally introduce the Hillsborough law in full, so that families can get the justice and accountability they need and deserve?
I thank the Minister for her statement and for her clear passion for this work. I welcome the reforms to ensure that the Flood Re scheme remains sustainable and financially viable in the medium term, and the £25 cap on flood excess for contents insurance for band A and band B properties will be particularly important to those who can least afford to be affected by flooding. However, the Minister knows that investment in flood defences is the only way to transition to a fully resilient system by 2039. Residents in Woodborough in my constituency will welcome the reforms, but what they really want to see is investment in a Woodborough flood alleviation scheme, which is long overdue. Will the Minister commit to working with me to ensure that Woodborough receives its fair share of the £1.4 billion investment in flood defences next year? Will she also join me in paying tribute to the Woodborough Flood Action Group, which does outstanding work in protecting Woodborough village in my constituency?