US air strikes on Iran were absolutely necessary, says Patel
It followed Operation Midnight Hammer last month, an air raid when US defence forces attacked Iranian nuclear sites near Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan.
UK Attorney General Lord Hermer is reported to have raised legal concerns about any potential British involvement in the conflict beyond defending its allies.
'Two weeks have passed since the US air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities,' shadow foreign secretary Dame Priti said.
'Does the minister have an assessment of their impact, and what is his response to the Iranian regime now prohibiting co-operation with the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) and their inspectors leaving Iran?
'Given Tehran's refusal to co-operate, is the minister and the department in discussions with the partners about snapback sanctions being applied (by reinstating UN sanctions on Iran removed through the 2015 Iran nuclear deal) and other measures?
'Is he concerned that demonstrates that Iran will continue to pursue nuclear weapons and their entire programme?
'And with the information received from discussions with America, Israel and other intelligence partners, will the Government finally come off the fence about those strikes and agree with this side of the House that they were absolutely necessary?'
Mr Falconer replied: 'I won't provide, I'm afraid, a detailed commentary from the despatch box on the extent of damage from the strikes, for reasons that I'm sure (Dame Priti) and the rest of the House will understand.
'I can confirm we are in discussions about the snapback mechanisms. As the Prime Minister (Sir Keir Starmer) has said, as the Foreign Secretary (David Lammy) has said, as I have said, we cannot see Iran get a nuclear weapon – snapback is an important lever.
'We're talking with our E3 partners and indeed the Americans about what role snapback can play.
'We hope to see a diplomatic solution. That is ultimately the most enduring way to ensure that Iran does not get a nuclear weapon, but we will continue to consider all diplomatic tools including snapback.'
Andrew Murrison referred to comments which Defence Secretary John Healey made on social media website X, when the Cabinet minister said the 'US has taken action to alleviate the grave threat that Iran poses to global security'.
The Conservative MP for South West Wiltshire told the Commons: 'The Defence Secretary correctly has said that Operation Midnight Hammer has alleviated a grave threat, but the Attorney General appears to be less clear and wonders if it was illegal, whilst the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary appear to sit on the fence.
'Sorry to put the minister on the spot – does he agree with the Attorney General or with the Defence Secretary?'
Mr Falconer replied: 'The Defence Secretary and the Attorney General are doing rather different roles, and I don't think they're in disagreement – and in any case, collective responsibility would bind them both and indeed me.'
The Foreign Office minister, whose portfolio includes the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan, also referred to a 'gap' in the law which independent reviewer of state threats legislation Jonathan Hall identified in a 2025 report.
Mr Hall recommended that the Government should be able to issue 'statutory alert and liability threat notices' against foreign intelligence services.
'By way of example, this strong power would be available for use against the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps', he wrote, referring to the Iran-backed organisation.
It would be a 'new proscription-type power', similar to existing terrorism legislation used to ban organisations such as Hamas and National Action, the reviewer said.
When Labour MP for Newcastle-under-Lyme Adam Jogee asked Mr Falconer to 'elaborate a little more on what that means', the minister replied: 'A state in this case has proved a persistent threat in the UK using methods unlike those usually employed by a state.'
He said the Government was 'seeking to fill' the gap in the law.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE SNP 'hypocrisy' row deepens as Scottish Government investment quango hands £18m in grants to arms firms
An SNP quango has handed out £18.4 million to defence firms in the past five years, despite ministers claiming the Scottish Government does not fund companies involved in munitions. In a move which will deepen a cross-border row over the SNP approach to defence spending, Scottish Enterprise has injected vast amounts of cash into companies which produce military equipment since 2020. The figures have sparked accusations that First Minister John Swinney and his Cabinet are playing 'student politics' and 'flip-flopping' to the detriment of the industry in Scotland. The SNP government is embroiled in a major row over its refusal to support a Rolls-Royce welding centre on the Clyde as it was linked to a Royal Navy 'attack submarine'. It has repeatedly said public money should not be spent on military equipment and firms involved in 'munitions'. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer branded the decision not to fund the centre 'staggering' and Defence Secretary John Healey said he could 'hardly believe' a Nationalist government would stand in the way of skills development in Scotland. The conflict deepened last week when ministers were accused of 'hypocrisy' for welcoming a new contract to help build a Royal Navy warship awarded to its embattled state-owned shipyard. Now, in response to a parliamentary question from Scottish Labour deputy leader Jackie Baillie, Scottish Enterprise has admitted that it spent £18.4 million on a number of defence projects. These include grants handed to firms such as BAE Systems, which makes artillery and tank munitions. Specific projects funded were for upskilling of workers to build naval ships on the Clyde. Meanwhile, another grant was handed to Thales UK – which makes complex weapons systems including a high velocity missile used by the British Army and the Royal Marines – for a 'civilian surveillance' and security project. Another company given funding to 'design, test and optimise advanced manufacturing processes' was Chemring Energetics UK Ltd, which sells explosives and detonating cords. Ms Baillie said: 'These figures expose the SNP's utter hypocrisy. It is right that we support Scotland's defence industry and the high-skilled jobs it provides, but the SNP's inconsistent flip-flopping does the industry no favours. 'The SNP needs to ditch the student politics and admit its ban on munitions funding is incoherent and anti-jobs.' Scottish Enterprise said it 'aims to develop good working relationships with many sectors and industries,' adding: 'That includes those operating in the defence sector, which employs tens of thousands of people.' Including a grant to BAE Systems in June worth £9 million, Scottish Enterprise gave £18,463,585 to defence companies in the past five years. A Scottish Government spokesman said: 'We recognise the importance of the aerospace, defence and shipbuilding sectors, which is why we have provided over £90 million in funding to companies operating in these sectors since 2006/07. 'Most recently, the Deputy First Minister [Kate Forbes] welcomed a £9 million Scottish Enterprise grant to BAE Systems to support a training and skills academy. 'Scottish Enterprise engagement and funding is only provided to support specific projects at Scottish sites and does not include assistance for projects related to the manufacture of munitions.'
Telegraph
5 hours ago
- Telegraph
Reeves to stop green groups from blocking defence investment
The Chancellor will announce plans to stop environmental activists blocking investment in defence in a major speech next week. Banks and pension funds currently follow environmental, social and governance (ESG) standards drawn up by private firms, which are meant to measure their impact on wider society. But pension giants and banks have been criticised for allowing these rules to restrict how much they invest in defence companies, on the basis that the firms do not promote social good. Rachel Reeves plans to bring ESG ratings under the powers of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), to ensure there is only one set of rules in future. The Treasury is expected to lay out secondary legislation later this year to facilitate the change. The new rules will benefit defence companies by making it clear that investors must take into account their positive role in keeping Britain secure. A Treasury source told The Sunday Telegraph: 'Rachel has always been clear that supporting the defence industry is consistent with ethical investing. 'If opaque ESG ratings are getting in the way of private investment, that has to change.' Officials are said to be looking to raise the profile of the Defence Investors' Advisory Group, and believe this would be a good opportunity to do so, a City source said. The group, which will be comprised of venture capital and private equity firms, will support defence start-ups and advise on how best to generate investment. In addition, the Ministry of Defence is expected to devise a financial services strategy by March 2026. A government consultation last year concluded that requirements for transparency around ESG ratings would support 'greater investor awareness of the defence industry's role'. 'Ill-considered anti-defence rules' It comes after Sir Keir Starmer vowed to spend at least 5 per cent of the UK's GDP on national security by 2035, including core defence spending rising to at least 2.5 per cent by April 2027, and 3 per cent by 2034. In March, more than 100 MPs and peers signed an open letter to the UK's finance industry urging it to 'sweep away ill-considered anti-defence rules' that limit investments in the arms industry. The letter said: 'We must rethink ESG mechanisms that often wrongly exclude all defence investment as 'unethical'.' Signatories include high ranking military figures including Baron Robertson of Port Ellen, the former general secretary of Nato, and Baron West of Spithead, a former Admiral in the Royal Navy. Aviva, Royal London and the National Employment Savings Trust (Nest) were among pension giants to restrict defence investment on ethical grounds. Later that month, António Simões, the chief executive of major pension firm Legal & General, said that defence companies should be considered ethical investments because countries need to be able to defend themselves. He said: 'There's no reason in principle why investing in defence companies cannot be consistent with responsible investing. 'Governments should promote peaceful and inclusive societies but countries also may need to defend themselves. This is a UN-type of principle. We've always said that defence companies, including UK defence companies, can be invested in.' Around £17 billion is invested in ESG funds in Britain. These ethical funds boomed in popularity after Covid with nearly 3,000 launched between 2020 and 2023 globally, attracting $600 billion of investment. Concerns have been raised that funds with ESG labels do not return as much for investors. Investors in actively managed 'green' funds would have seen their money underperform the average UK equity market by 3.8 per cent a year between the end of 2019 and the beginning of 2025, analysis by SCM Direct found in February.
Belfast Telegraph
7 hours ago
- Belfast Telegraph
Senior Orangeman joins calls for unionist unity as DUP leader says division ‘has cost us dearly'
Harold Henning, the Orange Order's Deputy Grand Master, said cooperation between parties should be 'demanded', not just encouraged. It came as Gavin Robinson said division had cost unionism dearly. Although neither specifically mentioned electoral pacts, both want greater party co-operation in future elections. Northern Ireland is next due to go to the polls in the 2027 Assembly election. In some seats, such as Lagan Valley at the last Westminster poll, a split vote has seen a non-unionist candidate elected. Mr Henning, speaking at the Twelfth in Maghera, Co Londonderry, made a clear plea for unionist co-operation. 'I recognise that the Orange family is a broad church in terms of its political views - however, one thing all our members can agree on is that our interests are best served as citizens of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,' he said. 'The leadership of this Institution remains consistent in its desire to see closer collaboration between the leadership of our pro-Union political parties so as to maximise unionist representation at all levels of government. 'Cooperation between our political representatives must be encouraged - more than that, it should be demanded, and country should always come before party or individual self-interest. 'Let's get that message out to our politicians – as a people, we want to see more unity of purpose across political unionism.' Twelfth celebrations get underway in Belfast Meanwhile, in a pre-Twelfth email to DUP members, Gavin Robinson said politicians must take note of the Orange Institution's "unifying power'. 'Across towns and villages, it brings together people from every walk of life, reminding us of the strength that comes when we stand side by side,' he said. 'That is a message unionism must learn from. We achieve more together than we do apart. 'Divided unionism has already cost us dearly. 'As we look ahead to Assembly and council elections in two years' time, we must explore how to maximise the pro-Union vote and return more unionist representatives, not fewer. 'The need for common purpose and cooperation has never been more obvious or more essential.' Meanwhile, South Antrim MP Robin Swann attacked the Windsor Framework during a speech at the Twelfth in Carnlough. In a direct message to Secretary of State Hilary Benn, Mr Swann said the Union is a commitment, not a convenience. 'The Windsor Framework does not restore our place fully in the UK internal market,' he said. 'It leaves Northern Ireland subject to foreign laws we cannot change. 'It carves a regulatory border between Larne and Stranraer, between Belfast and Ayrshire. 'It sends a message: That our place in the United Kingdom is conditional; that our rights as British citizens are somehow less equal than those across the water.' He added: 'The Framework may offer tweaks — but it does not solve the fundamental problem. Our economic, constitutional, and democratic rights remain compromised. 'So, we say to the Secretary of State, Hilary Benn - the Union is not a convenience - It is a commitment. 'And Northern Ireland must be fully, equally and permanently part of it, and you need to step up to the job you have been given.'
