1-20 of 3,934 results for subject:"Non-governmental organisations"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.597 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.01 seconds
- Search query
- subject:"Non-governmental organisations"
- We searched for
- subject_t:"Non-governmental organisations" OR subject_t:NGOs OR subject_ses:92174
Type
House
Session
More
Year
More
Department
More
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
More
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask His Majesty's Government what representations they have made to the Government of India regarding the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill 2026, and in particular about the impact the Bill would have on poor and vulnerable citizens in India, and those who depend on charity from overseas.
To ask His Majesty's Government what representations they have made to the Government of India regarding the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill 2026, and in particular about the impact the Bill would have on poor and vulnerable citizens in India, and those who depend on charity from overseas.
The UK is aware that some non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have faced significant difficulties due to the application of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, and that some have had applications to renew their foreign funding licenses rejected. We are continuing to monitor these developments and assessing their impact on UK Government-funded programmes and the work of British NGOs in India. However, it will remain for the Government of India to determine its own legislative and regulatory framework.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether she has had engagement with representatives of the Rapid Support Forces and their international allies regarding registration requirements for aid organisations operating in Sudan.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether she has had engagement with representatives of the Rapid Support Forces and their international allies regarding registration requirements for aid organisations operating in Sudan.
I refer the Hon Member to the response provided on 3 June to Question 4531 about the NAHA directives, and also to the speech and accompanying statement made by the Foreign Secretary to the UN Security Council about the UN Fact-Finding Mission on 19 February, links to which can be found below:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/foreign-secretarys-statement-on-the-un-fact-finding-mission-report-on-el-fasher
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/let-this-be-the-time-that-the-world-comes-together-to-end-the-cycle-of-bloodshed-in-sudan-uk-statement-at-the-un-security-council
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what representations her Department has made to the Rapid Support Forces on their requirement for international NGOs to register in Darfur; and what steps she is taking to help coordinate an international response to prevent organisations losing access...
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what representations her Department has made to the Rapid Support Forces on their requirement for international NGOs to register in Darfur; and what steps she is taking to help coordinate an international response to prevent organisations losing access...
The Government remains deeply concerned by the recent directives issued by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) Humanitarian Agency, that requires humanitarian organisations, including the UN, to register their presence in areas of RSF-control or face expulsion. Millions of Sudanese people, who are already in dire need of lifesaving aid and assistance, could be cut off from aid.
The UK, together with our international partners and the UN, has been lobbying the RSF leadership and their affiliated militias to rescind these requirements, and the RSF has agreed to extend the original 12 May deadline for registration by one month. It is critical that a lasting solution is found that does not further restrict the ability of humanitarian actors to operate throughout Sudan.
We remain committed to using all levers to press the warring parties to ensure unimpeded humanitarian access across Sudan and adhere to their obligations under international humanitarian law.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what steps she is taking to provide (a) financial and (b) diplomatic support to women's rights organisations operating in Gaza and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what steps she is taking to provide (a) financial and (b) diplomatic support to women's rights organisations operating in Gaza and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
The UK advocates for the full, equal and meaningful and safe participation of women in political and peace processes in Palestine, including through support to women's rights organisations. Through programmes such as Tasdeer, the UK supports women's economic empowerment in Palestine, including strengthening the Ministry of Women's Affairs and supporting women's participation in employment and business. We have also provided funding to the International Civil Society Action Network to fund Women's Alliance for Security Leadership members to deliver conflict related sexual violence response and prevention work in their communities, which included funding to Palestine.
How UK aid organisations may be able to access financial support. This page will no longer be updated.
How UK aid organisations may be able to access financial support. This page will no longer be updated.
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the remarks by Baroness Chapman of Darlington on 26 March (HL Deb col 1610) that "we are opposed to item 7 in the Human Rights Council", and the speech by the UK Human Rights Ambassador on 31 March in which she stated that...
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the remarks by Baroness Chapman of Darlington on 26 March (HL Deb col 1610) that "we are opposed to item 7 in the Human Rights Council", and the speech by the UK Human Rights Ambassador on 31 March in which she stated that...
The UK's longstanding and principled objection to Item 7 remains unchanged. Item 7 unfairly and uniquely singles out the State of Israel in comparison to other countries. The UK will continue to argue for the removal of Item 7 and to push for issues related to Israel-Palestine to be discussed under alternative agenda items.
We believe that engaging in negotiations, including abstaining where we judge appropriate, while making clear our principled opposition to Item 7, is more likely to secure UK influence over the texts. This is the approach that the UK maintained between 2006 and 2018 and is in line with the approach taken by many European partners.
UK Ministers regularly engage with the Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Jewish Leadership Council, to discuss a wide range of issues of mutual interest and concern.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what steps they have taken to coordinate with international partners to address the proliferation of antisemitism in international human rights bodies, as reported by organisations such as UN Watch and NGO Monitor.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what steps they have taken to coordinate with international partners to address the proliferation of antisemitism in international human rights bodies, as reported by organisations such as UN Watch and NGO Monitor.
My Lords, after the heinous events in north London just a few days ago, we must state once more that antisemitism has no place in our or any society. This Government are committed to stamping it out wherever and however it occurs, both in the UK and around the world. At the UN, OSCE and other multilateral fora, we consistently speak out against antisemitism and co-ordinate effective action to combat it in collaboration with international partners. This includes raising concerns directly at senior levels when they arise.
My Lords, after the heinous events in north London just a few days ago, we must state once more that antisemitism has no place in our or any society. This Government are committed to stamping it out wherever and however it occurs, both in the UK and around the world. At the UN, OSCE and other multilateral fora, we consistently speak out against antisemitism and co-ordinate effective action to combat it in collaboration with international partners. This includes raising concerns directly at senior levels when they arise.
My Lords, after the heinous events in north London just a few days ago, we must state once more that antisemitism has no place in our or any society. This Government are committed to stamping it out wherever and however it occurs, both in the UK and around the world. At the UN, OSCE and other multilateral fora, we consistently speak out against antisemitism and co-ordinate effective action to combat it in collaboration with international partners. This includes raising concerns directly at senior levels when they arise.
My Lords, I am sorry that two Questions this morning have to deal with antisemitism—I never thought it would come to this. Unfortunately, the United Nations and other bodies, such as Amnesty International and the United Nations Human Rights Council, treat Israel—and have done for a long time—as the emblem of everything that is bad in the world, making no distinction between Jews and the state. For example, the resolutions they have passed over the last few years greatly outweigh resolutions on any other state. The epitome of this perversion is Francesca Albanese, special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories, whose antisemitic comments verge on the deranged, blaming Mossad for the Charlie Hebdo murders, comparing Israel with the Third Reich and calling it the common enemy of humanity, and saying the BBC is an Israel lobby. Will the UK join France, Germany, Czech and Austria in calling for her dismissal?
My Lords, I am sorry that two Questions this morning have to deal with antisemitism—I never thought it would come to this. Unfortunately, the United Nations and other bodies, such as Amnesty International and the United Nations Human Rights Council, treat Israel—and have done for a long time—as the emblem of everything that is bad in the world, making no distinction between Jews and the state. For example, the resolutions they have passed over the last few years greatly outweigh resolutions on any other state. The epitome of this perversion is Francesca Albanese, special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories, whose antisemitic comments verge on the deranged, blaming Mossad for the Charlie Hebdo murders, comparing Israel with the Third Reich and calling it the common enemy of humanity, and saying the BBC is an Israel lobby. Will the UK join France, Germany, Czech and Austria in calling for her dismissal?
I hear what the noble Baroness is saying and it is true. I agree that Francesca Albanese has a history of making inflammatory comments such as this. Although special rapporteurs do not represent the UN, they are associated with the UN. We understand that they are independent, but it matters, and we have raised these concerns directly. The right way for this to be done is that special rapporteurs need to have objectivity and credibility. Where there are concerns, the comments that have been made need to be tested against the code of conduct, and then appropriate decisions ought to be taken.
I hear what the noble Baroness is saying and it is true. I agree that Francesca Albanese has a history of making inflammatory comments such as this. Although special rapporteurs do not represent the UN, they are associated with the UN. We understand that they are independent, but it matters, and we have raised these concerns directly. The right way for this to be done is that special rapporteurs need to have objectivity and credibility. Where there are concerns, the comments that have been made need to be tested against the code of conduct, and then appropriate decisions ought to be taken.
I hear what the noble Baroness is saying and it is true. I agree that Francesca Albanese has a history of making inflammatory comments such as this. Although special rapporteurs do not represent the UN, they are associated with the UN. We understand that they are independent, but it matters, and we have raised these concerns directly. The right way for this to be done is that special rapporteurs need to have objectivity and credibility. Where there are concerns, the comments that have been made need to be tested against the code of conduct, and then appropriate decisions ought to be taken.
My Lords, I am sorry that two Questions this morning have to deal with antisemitism—I never thought it would come to this. Unfortunately, the United Nations and other bodies, such as Amnesty International and the United Nations Human Rights Council, treat Israel—and have done for a long time—as the emblem of everything that is bad in the world, making no distinction between Jews and the state. For example, the resolutions they have passed over the last few years greatly outweigh resolutions on any other state. The epitome of this perversion is Francesca Albanese, special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories, whose antisemitic comments verge on the deranged, blaming Mossad for the Charlie Hebdo murders, comparing Israel with the Third Reich and calling it the common enemy of humanity, and saying the BBC is an Israel lobby. Will the UK join France, Germany, Czech and Austria in calling for her dismissal?
My Lords, I associate myself totally with the Minister’s remarks about the fight against antisemitism, both in the UK and internationally. On specific action with international partners, she will know that the previous Government, in 2023, together with the United Arab Emirates, passed Resolution 2686, which targeted the issues of antisemitism, Islamophobia and, importantly, the persecution of and hate against Christians globally. That is the kind of collaboration we need. I seek the Minister’s reassurance that we will continue to collaborate with international partners on specific initiatives such as those.
My Lords, I associate myself totally with the Minister’s remarks about the fight against antisemitism, both in the UK and internationally. On specific action with international partners, she will know that the previous Government, in 2023, together with the United Arab Emirates, passed Resolution 2686, which targeted the issues of antisemitism, Islamophobia and, importantly, the persecution of and hate against Christians globally. That is the kind of collaboration we need. I seek the Minister’s reassurance that we will continue to collaborate with international partners on specific initiatives such as those.
I meet regularly with our FORB envoy, David Smith, and support him very much in the work that he is doing around the world on this. I acknowledge, as I find myself doing very frequently at the Dispatch Box, the work that the noble Lord led in his time in the Foreign Office.
I meet regularly with our FORB envoy, David Smith, and support him very much in the work that he is doing around the world on this. I acknowledge, as I find myself doing very frequently at the Dispatch Box, the work that the noble Lord led in his time in the Foreign Office.
I meet regularly with our FORB envoy, David Smith, and support him very much in the work that he is doing around the world on this. I acknowledge, as I find myself doing very frequently at the Dispatch Box, the work that the noble Lord led in his time in the Foreign Office.
My Lords, I associate myself totally with the Minister’s remarks about the fight against antisemitism, both in the UK and internationally. On specific action with international partners, she will know that the previous Government, in 2023, together with the United Arab Emirates, passed Resolution 2686, which targeted the issues of antisemitism, Islamophobia and, importantly, the persecution of and hate against Christians globally. That is the kind of collaboration we need. I seek the Minister’s reassurance that we will continue to collaborate with international partners on specific initiatives such as those.
My Lords, does my noble friend the Minister agree that it is often difficult to draw the appropriate line between legitimate criticism of Israel—for example, in relation to Gaza and Iran—and antisemitism? Will she agree to undertake robustly to challenge any state that goes beyond that line into antisemitism?
My Lords, does my noble friend the Minister agree that it is often difficult to draw the appropriate line between legitimate criticism of Israel—for example, in relation to Gaza and Iran—and antisemitism? Will she agree to undertake robustly to challenge any state that goes beyond that line into antisemitism?
I do not find it difficult to draw the line between criticism of the State of Israel and antisemitism. I have expressed my concerns on the record around some of the problems with access of aid into Gaza, for example, and other issues over time. At no point does this criticism ever get anywhere near anything that could be described as antisemitic. People who do not know the difference need to educate themselves, and it is their responsibility to make sure that any comments they make could never be interpreted as being antisemitic. It is perfectly possible to hold strong views about the Middle East without being antisemitic. We need to be clear about that.
I do not find it difficult to draw the line between criticism of the State of Israel and antisemitism. I have expressed my concerns on the record around some of the problems with access of aid into Gaza, for example, and other issues over time. At no point does this criticism ever get anywhere near anything that could be described as antisemitic. People who do not know the difference need to educate themselves, and it is their responsibility to make sure that any comments they make could never be interpreted as being antisemitic. It is perfectly possible to hold strong views about the Middle East without being antisemitic. We need to be clear about that.
I do not find it difficult to draw the line between criticism of the State of Israel and antisemitism. I have expressed my concerns on the record around some of the problems with access of aid into Gaza, for example, and other issues over time. At no point does this criticism ever get anywhere near anything that could be described as antisemitic. People who do not know the difference need to educate themselves, and it is their responsibility to make sure that any comments they make could never be interpreted as being antisemitic. It is perfectly possible to hold strong views about the Middle East without being antisemitic. We need to be clear about that.
My Lords, does my noble friend the Minister agree that it is often difficult to draw the appropriate line between legitimate criticism of Israel—for example, in relation to Gaza and Iran—and antisemitism? Will she agree to undertake robustly to challenge any state that goes beyond that line into antisemitism?
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.
I broadly agree with the comments of the noble Lord.
I broadly agree with the comments of the noble Lord.
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, as noble Lords have said, we should all be deeply concerned by the resurgence of antisemitism around the world. We
must all unequivocally condemn the sickening recent incidents in our own country. The definition of antisemitism agreed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance is widely, though not universally, accepted, including by our own Government. It has also been adopted by the Church of England. Attached to that definition is a list of 11 possible examples of contemporary antisemitism, of which seven reference attitudes to the State of Israel. Would the Minister agree that one-sided, simplistic or inaccurate accounts of what is a complex and contested situation in Israel-Palestine can fuel the growth of antisemitism and other forms of religious hatred, including in our own country? If so, what support are His Majesty’s Government able to give to interfaith organisations that seek to present more balanced views and to encourage dialogue and learning around these difficult issues?
My Lords, as noble Lords have said, we should all be deeply concerned by the resurgence of antisemitism around the world. We
must all unequivocally condemn the sickening recent incidents in our own country. The definition of antisemitism agreed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance is widely, though not universally, accepted, including by our own Government. It has also been adopted by the Church of England. Attached to that definition is a list of 11 possible examples of contemporary antisemitism, of which seven reference attitudes to the State of Israel. Would the Minister agree that one-sided, simplistic or inaccurate accounts of what is a complex and contested situation in Israel-Palestine can fuel the growth of antisemitism and other forms of religious hatred, including in our own country? If so, what support are His Majesty’s Government able to give to interfaith organisations that seek to present more balanced views and to encourage dialogue and learning around these difficult issues?
Interfaith organisations have an important role to play in this area and in many others, too. The Government are willing to, and do, work alongside many interfaith organisations in this endeavour.
Interfaith organisations have an important role to play in this area and in many others, too. The Government are willing to, and do, work alongside many interfaith organisations in this endeavour.
Interfaith organisations have an important role to play in this area and in many others, too. The Government are willing to, and do, work alongside many interfaith organisations in this endeavour.
My Lords, as noble Lords have said, we should all be deeply concerned by the resurgence of antisemitism around the world. We
must all unequivocally condemn the sickening recent incidents in our own country. The definition of antisemitism agreed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance is widely, though not universally, accepted, including by our own Government. It has also been adopted by the Church of England. Attached to that definition is a list of 11 possible examples of contemporary antisemitism, of which seven reference attitudes to the State of Israel. Would the Minister agree that one-sided, simplistic or inaccurate accounts of what is a complex and contested situation in Israel-Palestine can fuel the growth of antisemitism and other forms of religious hatred, including in our own country? If so, what support are His Majesty’s Government able to give to interfaith organisations that seek to present more balanced views and to encourage dialogue and learning around these difficult issues?