Minister dismisses idea of split in Cabinet over Palestinian statehood
Israel announced at the weekend that it would suspend fighting in three areas of Gaza for 10 hours a day and open secure routes for aid delivery
Health Secretary Wes Streeting is among those to have signalled a desire for hastened action calling for recognition 'while there's still a state of Palestine left to recognise'.
While Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood said the Government wants to recognise a Palestinian state 'in contribution to a peace process'.
Speaking to Good Morning Britain, Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said: 'There's no split. The whole of the Labour Party, every Labour MP, was elected on a manifesto of recognition of a Palestinian state, and we all want it to happen.
'It is a case of when, not if.'
He added: 'It's about how we use this moment, because you can only do it once to have a meaningful breakthrough.'
He had earlier told Sky News that recognition would happen 'in this Parliament [..,.] if it delivers the breakthrough that we need'.
Later this week, the Prime Minister is expected to chair a Cabinet meeting on the conflict.
The UK is working with Jordan to airdrop aid into Gaza and evacuate children needing medical assistance, with military planners deployed for further support.
Humanitarian aid is airdropped to Palestinians over Gaza City (Jehad Alshrafi/AP)
However, the head of the UN's Palestinian refugee agency has warned such efforts are 'a distraction' that will fail to properly address deepening starvation in the strip, and could in some cases harm civilians.
Images and warnings of starvation emerging from Gaza in recent days have piled pressure on the Israeli government over its conduct in the conflict.
The Prime Minister held crisis talks with French and German counterparts on Saturday, during which Number 10 said they agreed 'it would be vital to ensure robust plans are in place to turn an urgently-needed ceasefire into lasting peace'.
A Downing Street readout of the call made no mention of Palestinian statehood, which Sir Keir has faced calls to immediately recognise after French president Emmanuel Macron announced his country would do so in September.
Some 221 MPs from Labour, the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, SNP, Greens, Plaid Cymru, SDLP and independents have signed a letter pressuring the Government to follow suit at a UN meeting next week.
The majority of those who have signed, 131, are Labour MPs.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
27 minutes ago
- The Independent
Civil service internships to be restricted to working class
The government will tighten eligibility criteria for Whitehall internships as part of a broader push to make the civil service more representative of the working class. According to the BBC, the main internship scheme will now be limited to students from 'lower socio-economic backgrounds'. Pat McFadden, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and the minister responsible for civil service reform, said that Whitehall needed to reflect the broader community. 'We need to get more working-class young people into the Civil Service so it harnesses the broadest range of talent and truly reflects the country,' he told the BBC. ' Government makes better decisions when it represents and understands the people we serve.' The changes are expected to take effect from summer 2026 and will give young people experience writing briefings, planning events, conducting policy research and shadowing civil servants, according to the broadcaster. The existing work summer placement programme, which lasts up to eight weeks and is paid, is open to undergraduates in the final two years of their degree. The Duchy of Lancaster has been contacted for comment. The move comes after the Government announced plans to move thousands more civil servants out of London as part of plans to 'radically reform the state'. In May, the Government confirmed it would cut the number of civil servants working in London by 12,000 and shift jobs to a series of new regional 'campuses' across the country. Mr McFadden said at the time that the Government would be relocating a 'substantial number of roles'. 'The aim is to reduce the London count by about 12,000. That will save us £94 million in lease costs because the properties in London are very expensive. 'And we will move thousands – it's difficult to put a precise number – thousands of those jobs to new themed campuses around the country,' he told Times Radio. The changes will also see 11 Government office buildings in London close, including one of its largest Westminster sites, in a move expected to save £94 million a year by 2032. The move will see two new major 'campuses' created, one in Manchester focused on digital innovation and AI and another in Aberdeen on energy. Manchester is already home to major offices of the science and culture departments, while Aberdeen houses the new Great British Energy headquarters. Other roles will be created in Birmingham, Leeds, Cardiff, Glasgow, Darlington, Newcastle and Tyneside, Sheffield, Bristol, Edinburgh, Belfast and York, with the changes expected to bring £729 million to the local economy by 2030.
The National
41 minutes ago
- The National
Force the 1% to cough up for their climate damage
Land ownership in Scotland is incredibly concentrated in a small number of hands. Fewer than 500 people own more than half of our private land. This motley group includes our own aristocrats, whose families have owned huge estates for centuries and whose wealth is often a result of their forebears' brutal actions during the Highland Clearances. But in recent decades they've been joined by a new group, the elite of global capitalism. The biggest landowner in Scotland used to be the Duke of Buccleuch, but now it's Danish billionaire Anders Povlsen. And the ruler of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum isn't far behind. READ MORE: More Scots need to benefit from Scotland's screen industry, John Swinney says And he might not be in the same league as Povlsen or the Sheikh in terms of hectares, but Scotland's most infamous landowner is undoubtedly Donald Trump. Thankfully, the US president has now returned home after a brief stint of shaking hands, being drowned out by bagpipes and teeing off at his Scottish golf courses. Last year, I proposed a private jet tax which would see Trump and his cronies charged a 'super rate' of up to £250,000 every time they fly here for non-government business. This is something which should be within the powers of the Scottish Government, but is now a decade overdue. In the aftermath of the independence referendum, all parties agreed to devolve air passenger duty to the Scottish Parliament. An Act was passed by MSPs to replace it with a new Scottish air departure tax. But it can't start until the UK Government resolves an issue with the exemption for lifeline island flights – and neither they nor the [[Scottish Government]] seem to be in any rush to do that. If this was resolved, the Scottish Government could immediately bring in a super-tax on private jets, reflecting the fact that they are about twenty times more polluting than regular flights. Personally, I'd rather ban most private air travel. It is the perfect example of how the world's richest 1% are disproportionately responsible for the climate crisis. Unfortunately, full powers over air travel are still reserved to Westminster for now. Trump doesn't care about the climate, but he would care about the £250,000 tax bill every time his huge private plane arrives here. Some super-rich elites would undoubtedly take the financial hit and still fly here anyway, but the money raised could at least then be used to fund climate-friendly policies like cheaper buses and trains. And private air travel is just one example of how the super-rich play by different rules to the rest of us, all whilst avoiding paying their fair share. For too long, they have been allowed to avoid not just paying their fair share in tax, but also having their often deeply damaging activities scrutinised. All while ordinary people suffer the consequences of budgets for schools, hospitals and social care being squeezed. Tax is the price we pay for living in a civilised society, one with public services capable of meeting all of our needs throughout our lives. But the richest among us do not pay nearly enough towards maintaining the services needed for that kind of society. The Scottish Greens have long called for a wealth tax, one which would see the richest 10% of people who hold almost half the total wealth of the country taxed fairly. Introducing just a 1% annual tax on all wealth and assets above £1 million would massively boost the efforts to create a fairer, better Scotland for everyone. For context, the other 90% of Scots households hold nowhere near enough wealth to be considered for such a tax, with the average having about £214,000 in assets. This would be an extremely well-targeted tax, raising billions from those who can more than afford to pay. We are not the only people calling for a wealth tax. Just this week, leading economists from across the world have called on Labour to introduce a UK-wide wealth tax to tackle extreme levels of inequality and poverty. They have warned the Government what the Greens have argued for years: that far too much wealth is concentrated in the hands of far too few people in the UK, and it is damaging society at large. Sadly, Labour seem determined to rule this out. It is time for Keir Starmer to seriously rethink his approach and what he wants his legacy to be: a society where everyone has what they need to get by, or one where far too many children are left in desperate poverty whilst a tiny number of people hoard more wealth than they could spend in a thousand lifetimes. The Scottish Greens are clear on what we need to do: tax the super-rich now, for the good of people and planet.
The National
41 minutes ago
- The National
How David Lammy went from human rights lawyer to genocide apologist
You would be forgiven for thinking that I'm quoting a frustrated political commentator – someone who has witnessed the deconstruction of international law by the Labour Government over the last year, and who is exasperated by their inertia. You'd be wrong. These are the words of Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, as he addressed the Bingham Centre for International Law in July 2023. During this speech, he said: 'There should be no power beyond or above the law. The law applies equally to all people.' READ MORE: Palestine Action gets green light for ban challenge He lamented that too many international crimes go unpunished, that too many dictators escape justice, and promised "wholeheartedly" to strengthen protections for humanitarian access and put the UK at the forefront of international legal debates. Well, he's certainly put the UK at the forefront of debates on international law. At best, because of his continued apology for Israel's war crimes. At worst, because of his active role in enabling these crimes. How does a human rights lawyer go from 'standing up for human rights and challenging impunity' to 'I am a steadfast supporter of Israel's security' after the state with which he so steadfastly stands has been accused of genocide, has murdered over 60,000 humans, and has gaslit many into thinking that it is the calling out of these atrocities which is the crime. Is he playing a geopolitical long game? The deep pockets of the Israeli lobby? Genuine callousness? As I write this, we have seen the bloodiest day in Gaza in 20 months. And yet, nothing from the UK Labour Government to suggest that this is a Cabinet which has 'international law fundamentally in its DNA', as Lammy once stated. When lawyers talk broadly about the UK breaching their obligations under international humanitarian law, they are usually referring to Geneva Conventions Common Article 1. This states that all High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and ensure respect for the convention in all circumstances. This means that states must act to prevent breaches of international law in every situation of armed conflict. However, the UK – along with two others – interprets this as meaning that they only have an obligation to uphold international humanitarian law when breaches occur in their own territory. The other states are Israel and the US. As well as Common Article 1, the ICJ confirmed that all states must act to prevent a genocide as soon as they are aware of a serious risk – mirroring the Genocide Convention – and reiterated by credible findings of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. However, during the Al-Haq case, Labour confirmed that the reason that they are not acting to prevent a genocide is because they have found no credible evidence to suggest a genocide is ongoing. The Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits transferring a population within occupied territory and Article 59 demands that occupying states allow unimpeded humanitarian aid for all civilians, while Additional Protocol I prohibits the starvation of civilians as a method of warfare. Yet, repeatedly Labour MPs and the UK Government have excused Israel's siege and failed to prevent the mass forced displacement of Palestinians. The latest announcement to airdrop aid into Gaza is simply a self-congratulatory distraction. READ MORE: SNP to press ahead with Palestine recognition vote The UK should have immediately and unequivocally suspended all Israeli trade arrangements, as they are prohibited from assisting situations created by breaches of international law, as per the ICJ and the ILC Articles on State Responsibility. Instead, Lammy and the Labour Government have sent a trade envoy to Israel, brag about their crucial trade partnerships, and still support Israel militarily. All of these obligations apply to the UK Labour Government. All of them are being breached. In January 2024, Lammy said that '…the rule of law requires compliance by the state with its obligations in international law, just as in national law. Labour agrees.' However, in July 2025, when speaking of Israel – a state accused of genocide –Lammy said he 'treasures the many connections between our peoples'. Despite their legal obligations and public and parliamentary outrage, the UK Labour Government could not be further from the vision that Lammy established in 2023. When Lammy gave his speech, there were echoes of Tony Benn's anti-war speech from 1998. Lammy ended his address by quoting the Preamble of the Charter of the United Nations, as Benn had. Lammy spoke of the responsibility of governments to make the right decisions to protect people, as Benn had. He warned against the mistakes that led to the Second World War, as Benn had. He praised the legacy of Britain in pursuing the international rules-based order in the 1940s, mirroring Benn's calls for continued progression towards peace. Lammy's transition from Benn-to-barely-able-to-muster-up-a-sentence-without 'Israel's right to defend herself' is not just due to the grip of the Israeli lobby, but can be likened to a child who hasn't done their homework and is hoping that the teacher doesn't ask them a question in class. As though if his tone drips with enough condescension people will be distracted from the words coming out of his mouth. Lammy has spent a year trying to convince us that the mass atrocities being committed against Palestinian civilians is normal. He has gone from forging a 'foreign policy underpinned by a fundamental belief in the rule of law' to facing claims that he is perpetuating Israeli war crimes. David Lammy has reduced himself from an eminent human rights lawyer to a genocide apologist. The support for Israel's genocide will be this Labour Government's legacy, just as the illegal Iraq war was the legacy of the 1997 Labour government. David Lammy will always be the Foreign Secretary who forgot about international law because he was too busy trying to sound clever. The Foreign Secretary that condemned the Palestinian people to genocide because he liked the sound of a speech more than he liked the idea of implementing it. Lara Bird-Leakey is a senior policy researcher for foreign affairs in Westminster for the SNP group
