| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
5 July 2007 : Column 337WH—continued
Mr. Malik: As ever, my hon. Friend raises a pertinent point. I am sure that he will have noticed that I am not yet the Foreign Secretary.
Richard Burden: Perhaps the Minister can pass on the message.
Mr. Malik: Given that some of the Foreign Secretary’s team are here today, I am quite sure that that important message will be conveyed.
The hon. Member for Hornsey and Wood Green was right to talk about the desperation that can push people to extremism, but I must say also that nothing can ever justify violence. I am not suggesting for a second that that is what she was saying, but it is an important statement that we cannot make often enough. It must be our job in part to try to eradicate the hardship that leads to such desperation and vulnerable people engaging in extremism and ultimately violence.
After the Good Friday agreement, I had the privilege to be appointed by the late Secretary of State for Northern Ireland as a commissioner for the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland. Those three years taught me that peace and prosperity go hand in hand, which is why it is correct that we are having this debate at this time, given the new reality that potentially exists in that part of the world.
Last but by no means least, I shall turn to the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness (Mark Simmonds). In my prepared text, I hope that I shall deal with many of his points. His reputation precedes him—and I do not mean that negatively. I was told to expect machine gun questions, but it was not as bad as I had expected. Maybe he was being kind and gentle because this is my first time speaking for the Government. Everybody in DFID welcomes the Committee’s stance on the number of DFID Ministers. Personally, of course, I have much for which to be grateful. With my inclusion, we have doubled the capacity of the ministerial team—although I am not so sure that we have doubled the intellectual capacity. There is a new political reality, but the truth is that we do not really know what that holds. We know that there is a real opportunity to get things moving in a way in which, over the past year and a half or so, we have been unable to do for a host of reasons. That in itself will generate much discussion.
The hon. Gentleman asked a question about the involvement of Arab states. I think that it would be in everybody’s interests to attempt to revive the 2002 Beirut declaration. I know that he and his party support that position. That potentially gives us an opportunity to begin some of that incredibly important work. The International Committee of the Red Cross has a well-established programme in the Gaza strip and the £1 million that has been signalled has already gone to those in the Gaza strip who will benefit.
There is now a significant opportunity to look at budgeting. Since June 2006, in addition to that £1 million, another £15 million of bilateral Government aid has gone in via the TIM to support front-line Palestinian health services, allowances for Government workers and the operation, maintenance and repair of water, sanitation and electricity services. In April, an additional £15.6 million went to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, which has helped to provide essential services such as health,
education and housing to 4.1 million Palestinian refugees in the west bank, Gaza, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria. Some 70 per cent. of the population of the Gaza strip are refugees who will benefit directly from that assistance.
On DFID’s objectives, the country assistance plan has not been changed. We are supporting and looking constantly to further peace and humanitarian assistance, but better aid remains critical to poverty reduction for Palestinians. DFID continues to support Lieutenant-General Dayton, the US security co-ordinator, in his efforts to improve movement across the Karni crossing.
Let me belatedly congratulate the International Development Committee on its report. It was an excellent read, or at least the summary of the summary was an excellent read. On a serious note, it was an excellent read. I congratulate it also on securing this really important debate at a crucial time. I welcome its work on this important issue and am pleased to say that the Government agree with many of its conclusions.
I would like to take the opportunity to join hon. Members in welcoming the release of Alan Johnston. I extend our best wishes to his family, friends, work colleagues and loved ones. It is welcome news from a part of the world where, sadly, good news is rather scarce. I acknowledge the role played by President Abbas and, indeed, Ismail Haniya and Hamas.
I thank hon. Members for their kind remarks on my new appointment. I shall speak from the heart: by and large, I think that all parliamentarians, and especially members of the International Development Committee, get involved in politics because they want to, and believe that they can, change the world. I am so privileged and utterly humbled to be playing a small role in a Department whose mission is nothing less.
This is a deeply troubling time for the occupied Palestinian territories. The political uncertainty, economic decline and worsening insecurity of the last year culminated in June, in the violent takeover of Gaza by Hamas, which has had serious political and humanitarian consequences. The majority of people want a peaceful two-state solution. I believe that even those who seem less keen on one must realise in their hearts of hearts that it is the only show in town.
I want to make it clear that violence—especially the violence that we have seen recently—is completely unacceptable; summary executions, attacks on hospitals, the abuse of captives and so on have no role to play in the occupied Palestinian territories or indeed anywhere else.
Along with my Government colleagues, I want to express my full support for President Abbas and his emergency Government headed by Prime Minister Fayyad. The priority for us now is to help in the best way we can. The former Secretary of State for International Development, who is now my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, spoke to Prime Minister Fayyad to explore how we can do that. We fully support the conclusions of EU Foreign Ministers on the need to develop the conditions necessary for urgent practical and financial assistance.
We must ensure that help reaches the 1.3 million people of Gaza. In that context, the Israeli decision to allow humanitarian access is most welcome. Since 15
June, more than 130 truckloads of basic food and humanitarian supplies have got through. That will help, but for Gazans to start rebuilding their lives, they need more than the very basics. They need to be able to buy fruit and vegetables, fresh milk and baby formula. For Gaza’s people to have money in their pockets, the economy needs to function. That means not only importing but exporting goods. We are pressing Israel to ensure full humanitarian access to Gaza and to allow trade as soon as possible.
What about the future? In many ways, the destiny of Hamas is in its own hands. We continue to call on Hamas to adhere to the Quartet principles: committing to non-violence, recognition of the state of Israel and acceptance of previous agreements. Ultimately, all parties must surely realise that sustainable peace can be attained only through dialogue that helps to create a common understanding. Bullets, bombs, killings and mayhem are exactly what ordinary people on all sides wish would cease.
Despite the current crisis in the occupied Palestinian territories, we must not forget the underlying problems that have prevented peace with Israel. Blame for the violence in Gaza lies with those who have chosen to pursue their aims through violence, but as we know too well, the responsibility for bringing a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is spread much more widely.
For Israelis, the consequence of militant Palestinian violence is a life marred by fear. Last year, 23 Israelis were killed by the violence both inside and outside the occupied territories. In the past six years, 3,500 rockets have fallen on the Israeli town of Sderot—I hope that I pronounced that correctly—causing 10 deaths. Many people in Israel feel under attack. The threat is reinforced by the failure of Hamas to meet international principles, and its violence in Gaza has merely exacerbated the situation.
In 2006, 661 Palestinians died as a result of Israeli military action. In the same period, the Palestinian economy contracted by about 10 per cent. One of the main causes was Israel’s decision not to pass on the VAT and customs revenues that it collects for Palestinians—about $55 million a month. That starved the Palestinian Authority of more than half their revenue, leaving them unable to pay their workers, on whom one quarter of Palestinians depend for their family’s livelihood. Businesses suffered because the Palestinian Authority simply could not pay bills. This week, Israel made its first payment in 15 months, of $120 million, to the emergency Palestinian Government. We call on Israel to release the remaining funds as soon as possible.
Withheld revenue has been the immediate cause of Palestinian economic decline, but the longer-term cause is Israeli security restrictions on movement. The average west bank Palestinian has been unable to visit friends or family in Gaza since 2000. Almost 550 roadblocks and checkpoints in the west bank limit the movement of goods and people from one town to another. That makes trade impossible: the cost of transporting a container from Gaza to the west bank is as much as that of moving it from the west bank to China. That has huge consequences for the economic, cultural and social fabric of Palestinian life.
Israel’s security concerns are legitimate and must be addressed, but the presence of almost 500,000 Israeli settlers throughout the occupied west bank, including
East Jerusalem, means that the security restrictions affect the whole west bank economy. The barrier winds its way around settlements, placing 10 per cent. of west bank land inside Israel, as has been said. Roads reserved for settlers make transport between cities for Palestinians in the west bank virtually impossible. Many colleagues have had the misfortune to witness that at first-hand; mercifully, we do not have to witness it every day.
One challenge for the international community is to show the Palestinian people that we have not forgotten them—we have not. We are providing support through the EU’s temporary international mechanism. Built on initial work by the UK, that has helped 150,000 Palestinian families—about 1 million people. It has ensured that health and education services have continued and it has provided fuel to ensure that power is provided to medical facilities, water and sewerage plants serving 1.3 million people.
Mr. Slaughter: The Minister has been generous with his time. He said that he hoped that the Palestinian people thought that the British Government had not forgotten them. I fear that people probably do think that the British Government have forgotten them. The statistics that he has given perhaps reveal that. I am thinking of the inequality of arms, quite literally, and the power that the Government of Israel have in relation to the Palestinian Authority.
The Minister gave the figure of 10 per cent. Is he aware that the World Bank report published in May said that access to 50 per cent. of the west bank was restricted for Palestinians, and is he aware that the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families made a speech a few weeks ago, when he was still the Economic Secretary to the Treasury, in which he said that Palestinian gross domestic product was only 7 per cent. of Israel’s and the average Palestinian income was only 6 per cent. of that of an Israeli? Are the Government not falling into the trap, in trying to be balanced, of not being balanced at all? They are giving equal weight to the Government of Israel and the Palestinian Authority in these matters, whereas in fact almost all the infringements that prevent the economic and political operation of a Palestinian state are as a result of the actions of the Government of Israel.
Mr. Malik: I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. He makes a criticism that I think many people will genuinely make. Sometimes it may be unhelpful to get into the issue of quantum. I accept fully that any objective person can consider the situation that I am painting as I speak and make their own analysis of it and draw their own inference from it. That is what my hon. Friend is doing. I was aware that the former Economic Secretary made those remarks; I happened to be present at the time and they are quite stark remarks, which should make us all face the reality of what is going on in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories and should fuel us to do even more to try to bring lasting peace and solve a problem that simply will not go away.
The 40th anniversary of the occupation is almost upon us. I can understand fully why people who are
suffering in that part of the world believe that they are being neglected, but I can assure my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, Acton and Shepherd’s Bush (Mr. Slaughter) that the Government do not believe that we could ever neglect the issue of the middle east. With regard to conflicts that need to be settled around the world, my personal perspective is that this one is probably No. 1. We need to understand that we live in an interdependent world. If we can get some hope in the middle east and bring some kind of just resolution for all parties concerned, that will take out much of the anguish and anxiety that we see, which affects not only the middle east but all parts of the world.
DFID and other European donors have so far given £188 million through the TIM, which shows that the international community can make a real difference when it works together. The Select Committee’s report makes a timely and valuable contribution. As usual, it has listened carefully to the evidence and provided considered advice. We agree that working outside the Palestinian Authority has added to the risk of its institutions failing. Following the appointment of the new Government of Prime Minister Fayyad we, along with the rest of the EU, are urgently looking at ways of working directly with them.
Ultimately, development for the Palestinian people depends on there being an end to the conflict. As the report notes,
“there is a fundamental relationship between Palestinian economic viability and Israeli security. The benefits from the achievement of both would be mutual.”
A two-state solution—a viable state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel with both being secure and respected within recognised borders—remains the only way for Israelis to live in peace and for Palestinians to live in dignity and to prosper. That solution must remain our aim, but it increasingly looks to be at risk. Although people broadly agree on what it will take, despair and disillusion is evident on all sides. Our challenge is to restore hope that peace is possible.
John Barrett: The biggest problem in relation to a two-state solution is the violation of the property rights of the Palestinians in the west bank. To have lost one’s land and then be told, “Let’s discuss potential compensation,” is similar to how it would be for the Minister if someone took his house from him, against his will, and then said, “Let’s discuss a price.” Does he agree that the settlements on the west bank are a major problem?
Mr. Malik: I thank the hon. Member for—his constituency escapes me for a split-second, but only for a split-second, I promise—Edinburgh, West, of course. It is better to check than to get it wrong. For the record, that comment was not aimed at anybody. The hon. Gentleman is right: the settlements are completely unacceptable. The Government’s position is, as I have already stated, for pre-1967 borders to be observed. I hope that that gives him some comfort regarding where we are coming from.
Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North) (Lab): Will the Minister give way?
Mr. Malik: I shall continue to be generous, as it is my first outing.
Jeremy Corbyn: I apologise that I was not here for the first part of the debate, as I had a constituency engagement. I congratulate the Minister on his appointment. I am interested in his last point. Is he saying—I hope that he is—that the Government’s position is that the settlements on the west bank must be removed as part of a peace process, rather than yet more Palestinian land having to be given up in return for a potential settlement in the future?
Mr. Malik: I am not going into the detail today, but am speaking about the principle. The detail will be negotiated and discussed between the parties who are directly involved. I am making a basic point about our position. We want to see a viable Palestinian state, on the pre-1967 borders, side by side with a secure, safe and confident Israeli state.
My hon. Friend the Member for Islington, North (Jeremy Corbyn) has helped me to move to my next point. Ultimately, only the Israelis and Palestinians can make peace. The Palestinian leadership must work hard to resolve the current situation. It must restore calm, it must open internal dialogue and it must demonstrate that it is capable of providing a competent Administration.
Israel must also play its part. As a first step, it must urgently release the remaining Palestinian revenues and provide adequate access into and out of Gaza. It should then ease movement and access restrictions in the west bank, and take a hard look at its policies on settlements, which are contrary to international law and threaten the viability of an agreed two-state solution. Actions from both Governments are needed. The current crisis might suggest that peace is further away than ever, but they could also choose to see it as an opportunity. For the sake of both ordinary Palestinians and Israelis, it is an opportunity that they must not fail to grasp.
I end by sharing an anecdote with the Chamber, which is about being positive. There is a lot of negativity around this subject, for obvious reasons. I was there as part of a delegation back in 1993. You are probably thinking that I was too young to be there, Mr. Bercow, or perhaps you are not, but I was there none the less. It was day seven, and the Oslo peace accord had just been announced. When one is there when something like that is happening, one thinks, “Is this really happening? Is it momentous, is it big, is it small?” At the time we relied on the seven o’clock news or the nine o’clock news to tell us what was going on in the world, or I certainly did, so when one is there and something like that happens, one thinks that it is too much of a coincidence.
It was day seven. We had visited a number of Israeli organisations in Jerusalem and elsewhere, and we were in the Gaza strip in the unofficial headquarters of the Palestine Liberation Organisation. At the time, Arafat et al were in Tunis and the delegates were in New York. We were with the PLO official who was the most senior in Gaza at the time, unofficially, when a camera crew came bursting in and a journalist thrust a mike in his face and said, “This peace—people are saying that it’s nothing and that the PLO have sold out. What do you say to that charge?” The PLO leader composed himself and said, “You are right; it is nothing, but the Palestinian people have never even been offered
nothing before. We are going to take this nothing and we are going to build something with it.” If they can be as positive now as they were then, and God knows they need to be, we can make some progress. The tunnel is long and dark, but if we intend to get through it, we need to focus on the light at the other end.
5.16 pm
Malcolm Bruce: I do not intend to delay the House any longer, but I want to thank all those who have taken part in this good, useful and timely debate. I thank also the Minister for his courteous and detailed responses, with which—I hope that he takes this in the spirit in which it is meant—he has acknowledged that we are in an uncertain situation that has changed even since the report. I do not criticise him for being unable to answer fully some of the questions that were asked, but I hope that he will consider the debate and write to hon. Members, or the Committee, if he feels that he can share additional information with us. Important points have been raised, and we would like to hear about how the TIM is going to progress, what it will mean in practical terms on the ground and how matters in Gaza will be dealt with in this difficult situation. I hope that he can update us on those points.
I have a few more quick points. The point that the hon. Member for Islington, North (Jeremy Corbyn) made in his intervention is very relevant here. It has to be taken on board, bluntly and squarely, that the situation with the settlements on the west bank is impossible if there is to be a solution. I want to quote from the evidence that David Shearer, the head of the UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs in Occupied Palestinian Territories, gave to the Committee. When talking about the road blocks on the west bank, he pointed out:
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |