1-20 of 5,036 results for askedby:"Lord Bruce of Bennachie"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.337 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.013 seconds
- Search query
- askedby:"Lord Bruce of Bennachie"
- We searched for
- tablingMember_ses:299418 OR askingMember_ses:299418
Type
House
Session
More
Year
More
Department
More
Member
More
Primary member
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
More
Subject
More
Publisher
With no disrespect to the Minister, it is regrettable that we do not have a dedicated Foreign Office Minister in this House. I hope that that will be rectified, but I welcome him to his post. The situation in both Indian- and Pakistan-administered Kashmir has for ever been one of clashes, crackdowns and human rights abuse. Will the Government consider reviewing the update of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights 2019 report that highlighted all this, and press for a long-term solution?
With no disrespect to the Minister, it is regrettable that we do not have a dedicated Foreign Office Minister in this House. I hope that that will be rectified, but I welcome him to his post. The situation in both Indian- and Pakistan-administered Kashmir has for ever been one of clashes, crackdowns and human rights abuse. Will the Government consider reviewing the update of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights 2019 report that highlighted all this, and press for a long-term solution?
I thank the noble Lord and I am sure, by the way, that we will have dedicated Ministers in this House. The Government are committed to that, but do not be disappointed when I get up to speak for the FCDO. As the noble Lord well knows, the United Kingdom’s long-standing position is that it is for India and Pakistan to find a lasting resolution on Kashmir that takes the wishes of the Kashmiri people into account. It is not for the United Kingdom to prescribe a solution or to act as a mediator; it is for those two countries to come to a solution that satisfies the people.
My Lords, we have more ships tied up than at sea. That was witnessed by the lack of a ship in the Med at the start of this recent conflict and the delay in mobilising HMS “Dragon”. Where is the urgency in covering that gap? Also, with no replacement for our destroyers, how are we going to protect ourselves against the growing threat of ballistic missiles?
My Lords, we have more ships tied up than at sea. That was witnessed by the lack of a ship in the Med at the start of this recent conflict and the delay in mobilising HMS “Dragon”. Where is the urgency in covering that gap? Also, with no replacement for our destroyers, how are we going to protect ourselves against the growing threat of ballistic missiles?
One of the things we are doing was announced yesterday by my colleague from the other place in Faslane: £26 billion of investment over the next 10 years into naval bases across the whole UK, so that we can improve the availability of our ships. We also need investment in our shipyards, which is taking place. That is one of the ways we are seeking to do this. We will improve availability, but it will take some time. On the Type 45 destroyers and their replacement, we are looking to the Navy of the future, which will have air defence and ways of dealing with the threats we face—but in a different way from simply replacing our existing warships.
My Lords, I declare an interest as an adviser to DAI. I welcome what the Minister has said about UK government action, but, as she will know, at an event I hosted recently in this House, we heard how local actors were delivering humanitarian aid on the ground where international agencies could not get. I am glad the Government are supporting those, but will they do more to support the emergency response rooms in Sudan? In some cases, they are the only agencies delivering to the people, and it is worth taking the risk of giving them a bit more money.
My Lords, I declare an interest as an adviser to DAI. I welcome what the Minister has said about UK government action, but, as she will know, at an event I hosted recently in this House, we heard how local actors were delivering humanitarian aid on the ground where international agencies could not get. I am glad the Government are supporting those, but will they do more to support the emergency response rooms in Sudan? In some cases, they are the only agencies delivering to the people, and it is worth taking the risk of giving them a bit more money.
I agree with the noble Lord. I have met them, and I think they are fantastic. They are not required to meet the registration requirements of the RSF, so they are able to operate more flexibly. We have increased our funding to them for that reason.
My Lords, will the UK Government liaise with France, which is taking over the chairmanship, to ensure that what has been agreed is maintained and that the technical expertise is also maintained? Can the Minister comment on the committee that the Government are setting up in the House of Commons, sadly with no representation from this House, to scrutinise UK nuclear expenditure? Given that the workings of that committee are going to mostly be classified, how does that help public engagement with understanding the issue, or help to secure commitment to maintaining non-proliferation?
My Lords, will the UK Government liaise with France, which is taking over the chairmanship, to ensure that what has been agreed is maintained and that the technical expertise is also maintained? Can the Minister comment on the committee that the Government are setting up in the House of Commons, sadly with no representation from this House, to scrutinise UK nuclear expenditure? Given that the workings of that committee are going to mostly be classified, how does that help public engagement with understanding the issue, or help to secure commitment to maintaining non-proliferation?
I am afraid that I know absolutely nothing about the committee that is being set up at the other end of the building.
My Lords, we welcome the Government’s response to this truly devastating earthquake. As co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Aid Match, I thank the Government for the £2 million they have offered, but, as the vice-chair of the DEC says, the public have raised £12 million. Will the Government consider raising the contribution from aid match? Will they perhaps also persuade the Treasury that rather than having the money taken out of existing development funds, it should be genuinely additional, so that aid match adds money and the public can influence how our aid money is spent?
My Lords, we welcome the Government’s response to this truly devastating earthquake. As co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Aid Match, I thank the Government for the £2 million they have offered, but, as the vice-chair of the DEC says, the public have raised £12 million. Will the Government consider raising the contribution from aid match? Will they perhaps also persuade the Treasury that rather than having the money taken out of existing development funds, it should be genuinely additional, so that aid match adds money and the public can influence how our aid money is spent?
I am very happy to put money into the Venezuelan response, but we can all work out that every penny we put into one response leaves us less for the next crisis. We have an El Niño year; we are about to start hurricane season. We have food insecurity across Africa because of the conflict in the Middle East. It would be irresponsible for me just to make commitments about what we will and will not do from this Dispatch Box in such a serious situation. It has been a truly global response in Venezuela, and that is very good to see. We have seen a particularly strong response from Latin America, which is encouraging, and the United States has also played a leading role. It has been a good example of how the international community can come together and co-ordinate to great effect.
My Lords, I welcome the Government’s and the Minister’s commitment to trying to ensure that women are involved. I am sure that she will agree that in recent years we have seen conflicts mostly promoted by misogynist men who have no interest in the rights of women. Will the Government call on the US, Israel and Iran to include women in the negotiations as the best way to present conflict reigniting? As she says, without women’s involvement, the chances of settlements sticking are very low. Will she pressure those countries to recognise Resolution 1325 and implement it?
My Lords, I welcome the Government’s and the Minister’s commitment to trying to ensure that women are involved. I am sure that she will agree that in recent years we have seen conflicts mostly promoted by misogynist men who have no interest in the rights of women. Will the Government call on the US, Israel and Iran to include women in the negotiations as the best way to present conflict reigniting? As she says, without women’s involvement, the chances of settlements sticking are very low. Will she pressure those countries to recognise Resolution 1325 and implement it?
I do not hesitate to support what the noble Lord has said about the inclusion of women. I would go a little bit further and say that peace which is achieved, or pauses in conflict which are achieved, through imposition of agreements that have not been negotiated through the long, hard, diligent, inclusive process that we all know about in this Chamber rarely stand the test of time.
Tabled by
Lord Bruce of Bennachie
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the total amount transferred to the Scottish Government in the last financial year following the devolution of social security benefits.
Tabled by
Lord Bruce of Bennachie
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the total amount transferred to the Scottish Government in the last financial year following the devolution of social security benefits.
My Lords, following the devolution of social security powers, the Scottish Government are responsible for funding and administering social security benefits, with funding transferred from the UK Government. Funding for devolved social security is provided through welfare block grant adjustments that transfer funding from the UK Government to the Scottish Government. In the most recent financial year, this
amounted to £5.8 billion for the Scottish Government. Decisions on how funding is used are for the Scottish Government.
My Lords, I declare an interest as an adviser to the aid and development contractor DAI. I am hosting an event in Parliament this evening looking at new and innovative ways to support humanitarian action as traditional funding streams shrink. I am delighted that the Minister has agreed to attend. In that spirit, will she say what progress has been made to use UK trade, investment, philanthropy, the private sector and other routes to deliver real poverty reduction benefits in developing countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, either alongside remaining aid programmes or as an alternative?
My Lords, I declare an interest as an adviser to the aid and development contractor DAI. I am hosting an event in Parliament this evening looking at new and innovative ways to support humanitarian action as traditional funding streams shrink. I am delighted that the Minister has agreed to attend. In that spirit, will she say what progress has been made to use UK trade, investment, philanthropy, the private sector and other routes to deliver real poverty reduction benefits in developing countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, either alongside remaining aid programmes or as an alternative?
I very much welcome the question from the noble Lord. He will be aware that we had a Global Partnerships Conference just a few weeks ago addressing specifically that problem.
I think it is understood now, if it was not before, that with all the aid spending that there has ever been, we would still be falling far short of our ambitions and the ambitions of our partner countries to achieve the sustainable development goals. We do have to work better together, and we do have to leverage, as the noble Lord said, and we do have to grow economies and enable partners to lead their own development, because that is not just the right thing to do in terms of making the money go further, but it is the right way to be a good partner for the long term too.
My Lords, I was also involved in a small way in the Bangsamoro project; I have not visited the region, but I have engaged with parliamentarians. This earthquake is a major setback for the region on its recovery. Why is it that in the past, before our aid cuts, when there was a major earthquake or a major disaster, we had an immediate response from an operation in Victoria Street to send out a response within hours, rather than waiting for a call from the Government? Has that capacity been abolished? At the moment, with all our engagement in in the area, do we not need to offer a bit more than the ambassador’s sympathy?
My Lords, I was also involved in a small way in the Bangsamoro project; I have not visited the region, but I have engaged with parliamentarians. This earthquake is a major setback for the region on its recovery. Why is it that in the past, before our aid cuts, when there was a major earthquake or a major disaster, we had an immediate response from an operation in Victoria Street to send out a response within hours, rather than waiting for a call from the Government? Has that capacity been abolished? At the moment, with all our engagement in in the area, do we not need to offer a bit more than the ambassador’s sympathy?
With respect, I do not think we are just offering the ambassador’s sympathy. We stand ready to help and have ensured that our commitments to humanitarian assistance have been protected, so I am afraid that I do not quite accept the characterisation the noble Lord puts forward. On the Bangsamoro peace process, it is an important commitment that the
UK has been heavily involved in, supported by my noble friend Lord McConnell, and we will continue to be actively engaged in that.
My Lords, ZANU-PF has justified extending the term of the president, and giving him a third term, on the grounds that he is “doing a good job”. It has also said that not having elections from the people, but in parliament, will save money and reduce the risk of violence, which we know is mostly perpetrated against the people by ZANU-PF. What is the price of democracy? Does it not show that ZANU-PF has utter contempt for democracy, and how can we challenge it to reverse its decisions?
My Lords, ZANU-PF has justified extending the term of the president, and giving him a third term, on the grounds that he is “doing a good job”. It has also said that not having elections from the people, but in parliament, will save money and reduce the risk of violence, which we know is mostly perpetrated against the people by ZANU-PF. What is the price of democracy? Does it not show that ZANU-PF has utter contempt for democracy, and how can we challenge it to reverse its decisions?
There is an active civil society in Zimbabwe. My noble friend Lord Collins visited last year, and we will continue to work with stakeholders, including the Zimbabwean Government. We welcome the president’s re-engagement efforts, and the progress on economic reform, but we understand the concerns about these constitutional reforms as proposed, and we will continue to advocate about that.
My Lords, it is disturbing that Jewish individuals and communities feel themselves vulnerable to attacks, threats, criticisms and abuse. It is absolutely right, especially if it comes from within international organisations that we support, that we call it out, condemn it and show solidarity to the community. I echo the words that have been said. There is legitimate criticism of Israel, and it is perfectly possible to criticise. I chaired two committee reports that were very critical of Israel. Never did we stray anywhere near antisemitism. Criticism of Israel should never be justification for making antisemitic remarks. The State of Israel and the worldwide Jewish community are different and separate, and can always be kept separate.
My Lords, it is disturbing that Jewish individuals and communities feel themselves vulnerable to attacks, threats, criticisms and abuse. It is absolutely right, especially if it comes from within international organisations that we support, that we call it out, condemn it and show solidarity to the community. I echo the words that have been said. There is legitimate criticism of Israel, and it is perfectly possible to criticise. I chaired two committee reports that were very critical of Israel. Never did we stray anywhere near antisemitism. Criticism of Israel should never be justification for making antisemitic remarks. The State of Israel and the worldwide Jewish community are different and separate, and can always be kept separate.
I broadly agree with the comments of the noble Lord.
My Lords, we all need to value the bravery and independence of journalists who operate in really difficult situations and who need the support of the coalition and Governments. What will the Government do to raise the UK’s position on the media index from 10, and on the international one from 23? Given the US is a member of this organisation, how can they square legal action against the BBC that, if successful, would destroy the BBC, the BBC World Service and BBC Media Action? Will the Government ask the United States Government to recognise that?
My Lords, we all need to value the bravery and independence of journalists who operate in really difficult situations and who need the support of the coalition and Governments. What will the Government do to raise the UK’s position on the media index from 10, and on the international one from 23? Given the US is a member of this organisation, how can they square legal action against the BBC that, if successful, would destroy the BBC, the BBC World Service and BBC Media Action? Will the Government ask the United States Government to recognise that?
Obviously, what the United States Government choose to do is a matter for the United States Government. On the World Service, I am very pleased that last Thursday we were able to announce an uplift in our grant funding
to the World Service of an additional 12%, even in the straitened fiscal circumstances in which we had to make that choice. It does vital work and I would not want to see anything jeopardise it.
My Lords, there are ships still getting through the Strait of Hormuz, but they are of course friends of Iran, which possibly includes China and Russia. I would argue that Russia’s shadow fleet no longer is a shadow fleet if sanctions have been lifted by the United States. It surely comes down to the fact that we will not reopen the Strait of Hormuz unless we end the conflict and negotiate a settlement. It is not safe for the Americans to put their ships in. They certainly should not expect us to put ours in.
My Lords, there are ships still getting through the Strait of Hormuz, but they are of course friends of Iran, which possibly includes China and Russia. I would argue that Russia’s shadow fleet no longer is a shadow fleet if sanctions have been lifted by the United States. It surely comes down to the fact that we will not reopen the Strait of Hormuz unless we end the conflict and negotiate a settlement. It is not safe for the Americans to put their ships in. They certainly should not expect us to put ours in.
We need to resolve this with great care, co-ordination and collaboration with our allies and partners. It is complicated. As the noble Lord said, it is directly related to the conflict in Iran. We are where we are and we will do everything that we can, alongside others, to ensure that ships can travel safely through the strait.
My Lords, Taiwan has built an impressive democracy over the past 20 years and set up its own foundation for democracy along the lines of the Westminster Foundation for Democracy, which also works there. However, the reality for Taiwan is that its democracy will survive only as long as it survives and is not incorporated into China. No “one country, two systems” model is now available, given the destruction of that model that has been wreaked upon Hong Kong. What are the Government doing with others to ensure that China is fully deterred from taking any action against Taiwan?
My Lords, Taiwan has built an impressive democracy over the past 20 years and set up its own foundation for democracy along the lines of the Westminster Foundation for Democracy, which also works there. However, the reality for Taiwan is that its democracy will survive only as long as it survives and is not incorporated into China. No “one country, two systems” model is now available, given the destruction of that model that has been wreaked upon Hong Kong. What are the Government doing with others to ensure that China is fully deterred from taking any action against Taiwan?
As I said, we do not support anyone taking unilateral action in Taiwan. As the noble Lord knows, we work closely with our partners
and allies on this. We are aware of Taiwan’s strategic importance to global trade in maritime movement of goods and semiconductors, and therefore not only in relation to democratic values and the points that the noble Lord raises. We are very conscious indeed of the importance of Taiwan and we take that into account in not only our bilateral work with it but our relations with our partners and allies.
My Lords, of course we welcome the decision to award the helicopter contracts for Yeovil, which the local MP, Adam Dance, has been campaigning for, and we are glad that it has been signed. But the reality is that without this investment plan, there are jobs and investment on hold in defence installations right across the UK. They desperately need to know when the orders are going to flow and when the money is going to come through. We also need to ensure that small and medium-sized businesses have a real stake in building up our high-tech capacity and in filling in our munitions requirements.
My Lords, of course we welcome the decision to award the helicopter contracts for Yeovil, which the local MP, Adam Dance, has been campaigning for, and we are glad that it has been signed. But the reality is that without this investment plan, there are jobs and investment on hold in defence installations right across the UK. They desperately need to know when the orders are going to flow and when the money is going to come through. We also need to ensure that small and medium-sized businesses have a real stake in building up our high-tech capacity and in filling in our munitions requirements.
On the last point, of course munitions are important, as we see particularly at the moment. That is why the Government are investing £1.5 billion in six new munitions sites. Thirteen sites have been identified, they are being reviewed, and we will come forward with those munitions sites so that we have them available. Again, that is money being invested. We are also talking about small and medium-sized businesses. We know that the future is not just in the big primes but in small and medium-sized businesses. That is why we have set up within the Ministry of Defence an organisation to drive that growth. Small and medium-sized businesses are crucial, and we will develop those as well.
My Lords, can the Minister say how many of these submarines are operational at any one time? Many have been out of service quite frequently. Given the constraints, are we sure that we can maintain the programme that he has outlined and deliver AUKUS on time and on budget?
My Lords, can the Minister say how many of these submarines are operational at any one time? Many have been out of service quite frequently. Given the constraints, are we sure that we can maintain the programme that he has outlined and deliver AUKUS on time and on budget?
I am confident about that. I will not go into the number of submarines that are operational for obvious reasons, but the noble Lord will have heard the First Sea Lord outlining the submarine recovery plan a couple of months ago, which was about doing more to ensure that our docking and maintenance facilities are of the standard that we want. That will also help us ensure that we get the availability that we want.
Is not the reality that the defence investment plan has been delayed because of concerns inside government and the Cabinet about its affordability, especially given the commitment to increase our own sovereign capacity? In that context, is not the reality that cuts will have to be made to achieve that, and simply to fulfil the current budget? Will the Government recognise that we need to have a much clearer and honest declaration of exactly what is needed? The public need to know what the threat is and why we need to spend more on it.
Is not the reality that the defence investment plan has been delayed because of concerns inside government and the Cabinet about its affordability, especially given the commitment to increase our own sovereign capacity? In that context, is not the reality that cuts will have to be made to achieve that, and simply to fulfil the current budget? Will the Government recognise that we need to have a much clearer and honest declaration of exactly what is needed? The public need to know what the threat is and why we need to spend more on it.
I agree with the last point about making sure that the public have greater awareness of the threats faced, and the national conversation. The noble Lord has asked me about that before, and we are seeking to do something about it.
Within the current budgets, we have signed more than 1,000 defence contracts since July 2024, 86% with British-based businesses, and spent more than £31 billion with UK industry. If the noble Lord were Secretary of State for Defence, he would have a budget and would have to make choices about which capabilities he believed were necessary to bring the country to the war-fighting readiness we need. Those are the discussions at the present time. I know there is frustration about the delay to the defence investment plan, but I would rather have a plan that is affordable and meets the needs of our Armed Forces and defence industry, so that we can fight the wars of the future.
My Lords, we are talking about the security of the Arctic. The United States of course has legitimate interests, but so does Denmark, Greenland, Finland, Sweden, Norway and, more recently, the United Kingdom. Following my noble friend’s Question, the reality is that, if the US takes a unilateral action against the NATO alliance, it will not increase security but damage it and open the door for Russia and China to make more incursions into our space. Can the Americans understand that they are going down the wrong path?
My Lords, we are talking about the security of the Arctic. The United States of course has legitimate interests, but so does Denmark, Greenland, Finland, Sweden, Norway and, more recently, the United Kingdom. Following my noble friend’s Question, the reality is that, if the US takes a unilateral action against the NATO alliance, it will not increase security but damage it and open the door for Russia and China to make more incursions into our space. Can the Americans understand that they are going down the wrong path?
Any question that starts with “if” is, by definition, a hypothetical—to which I am not in a position to give a concrete response. All I would say is that, clearly, anything that causes dispute between NATO allies would be very pleasing for Vladimir Putin to see, and that is not something that we want to bring about.
My Lords, before Maduro was captured, it was about drug trafficking. After he was captured, it was about oil. Now the regime is cracking down and Venezuelans are suffering, but the US threatens Colombia, Mexico and Greenland, not forgetting Canada. Are the UK Government capable of making it clear to the US that sovereignty is not just for the United States and that annexation for personal gain and commercial exploitation is not only unacceptable but incompatible with support for democracy and human rights?
My Lords, before Maduro was captured, it was about drug trafficking. After he was captured, it was about oil. Now the regime is cracking down and Venezuelans are suffering, but the US threatens Colombia, Mexico and Greenland, not forgetting Canada. Are the UK Government capable of making it clear to the US that sovereignty is not just for the United States and that annexation for personal gain and commercial exploitation is not only unacceptable but incompatible with support for democracy and human rights?
The United Kingdom’s support for international law and for human rights is unwavering and has not changed. The actions of the United States are for the United States to explain, and that includes how it sits in relation to international law.
My Lords, can I press the Minister on why the investment plan has been delayed for so long? Is it because there is disagreement within the Government about its affordability and how we can develop our capacity if we were to reduce dependence on Americans and yet have walked away from joint procurement with the EU, which Canada has joined, and we have rejected?
My Lords, can I press the Minister on why the investment plan has been delayed for so long? Is it because there is disagreement within the Government about its affordability and how we can develop our capacity if we were to reduce dependence on Americans and yet have walked away from joint procurement with the EU, which Canada has joined, and we have rejected?
The noble Lord often raises capability and defence investment in our industry. One of the challenges we faced was the fact that our industries have declined. Much of the ability of defence infrastructure to produce the things that we need has gone, and the Government are trying to do something about that. We have announced new munitions factories and we have got the defence investment plan coming. We are trying to recognise that, in order to fight wars now and those which may come in the future, we need a defence industry which has the capacity to deliver the equipment and goods that we need.