Minister calls on Israel to end ‘indefensible' blockade on Gaza humanitarian aid
Labour MPs shouted 'or what' as Hamish Falconer said the UK is calling on the Israeli government to allow humanitarian organisations to save lives, and that the denial of aid is 'indefensible'.
Israel's offensive in Gaza has killed more than 52,800 Palestinians, many of them women and children, according to Gaza's Health Ministry, which does not say how many of the dead were combatants or civilians.
Israel has obliterated vast swathes of Gaza's urban landscape and displaced 90% of the population, often multiple times.
International food security experts issued a stern warning earlier this week that the Gaza Strip is likely to fall into famine if Israel does not lift its blockade on aid and stop its military campaign.
Tom Fletcher, head of the UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs and previously a foreign affairs specialist to three UK prime ministers, has condemned Israel for 'deliberately and unashamedly' imposing inhumane conditions on Palestinians – including the risk of famine.
Green Party co-leader Adrian Ramsay called an urgent question in the Commons on the UK's assessment as to whether Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians.
Mr Falconer told MPs: 'Israel's denial of aid is appalling. Tonnes of food are currently sitting rotting at the Gaza-Israel border blocked from reaching people who are starving.
'Israeli ministers have said Israel's decision to block this aid is a pressure lever. This is cruel and it is indefensible. Overnight, yet more Palestinians have been killed in Israeli strikes. This must end. The message yesterday was clear. The world demands Israel stop and change course immediately.'
Labour backbenchers shouted 'or what' as Mr Falconer said: 'With our allies, we are telling the government of Israel – lift the block on aid entering Gaza now, enable the UN and all humanitarians to save lives now, we need an immediate ceasefire now.
'Humanitarian aid must never be used as a political tool or military tactic, and the UK will not support any aid mechanism that seeks to deliver political or military objectives or puts vulnerable civilians at risk.'
In July, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an advisory opinion that ruled Israel should pay reparations to the Palestinian people, Israel's policies violate the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and the creation of Israeli settlements are illegal under international law.
South Africa has submitted four requests for the ICJ to investigate Israel for genocide and the court has already found that there is a 'real and imminent risk' to the Palestinian people in Gaza by Israel's military operations.
Mr Falconer told MPs that the Government supports the ICJ and its independence.
He said: 'The ICJ issued a set of provisional measures in this case, and we support those measures. Israel has an obligation to implement them.'
'It is the UK Government's long standing position that any formal determination as to whether genocide has occurred is a matter for a competent court and not for governments or non-judicial bodies.
'The UK is fully committed to upholding our responsibilities under domestic and international law, and we have at all times, acted in a manner consistent with our legal obligations, including under the Genocide Convention.'
In May 2024, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then-defence minister Yoav Gallant.
Mr Ramsay raised concerns over the risk of famine in Gaza, adding: 'There's one primary cause – Israel's aid blockade since March 2.'
Labour MP Dr Rosena Allin-Khan (Tooting) said: 'Almost a million children at risk of famine and death in Gaza. Those who have stood by and allowed this to happen should hold their heads in shame.
'I call on this Government to sanction Israeli officials until the blockade is lifted because if we do not act now this will be on us.'
Labour MP Andy McDonald (Middlesbrough and Thornaby East) said there is a 'growing body of opinion' that says the UK is not doing everything it can to observe international law.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
an hour ago
- The National
Owen Jones: The UK media has ignored this hugely revealing scandal
And yet Benjamin Netanyahu – the Israeli prime minister subject to an International Criminal Court arrest warrant – has been accused of forging this alliance by the Israeli political class. And yet – once again – the Westminster media has overwhelmingly failed to cover this latest profoundly revealing scandal. Avigdor Lieberman is a far-right opposition leader who once served as Netanyahu's deputy prime minister, foreign minister and defence minister. This week, he publicly announced: 'The Israeli government is giving weapons to a group of criminals and felons, identified with Islamic State, at the direction of the prime minister.' Did Netanyahu come out swinging, accusing his opponent of antisemitism, as he did when another opposition leader, former Israeli general Yair Golan, declared that Israel was killing babies as a hobby? READ MORE: Patrick Harvie: Increased UK defence spending only makes war more likely He did not. Instead, Netanyahu bragged that 'Israel is working to defeat Hamas in various ways, on the recommendation of all heads of the security establishment'. In a video message, he clarified that Israel had 'activated clans in Gaza that oppose Hamas', shamelessly calling it 'a good thing' which was saving the lives of Israeli soldiers. 'What's wrong with that?' We're talking here about a militia headed by a man named Yasser Abu Shabab. He styles his faction as the 'Anti Terror Service', but it is a criminal gang operating in an area of Rafah firmly under Israeli military control. His own family has not only disowned him, but backed his execution. According to Palestinian analyst Muhammad Shehada, his militia is composed of 300 'drug dealers and criminals.' And here's the important detail. To justify imposing a total siege on Gaza, Israel claimed that Hamas was stealing humanitarian food. Among those pointing out this wasn't true was Cindy McCain, widow of the late hawkish Republican senator John McCain, and now director of the World Food Programme. But we do know that Shabab's Israel-backed gang has been stealing aid. As ever with the Israeli authorities: every accusation is a confession. This is just another plank of Israel's starvation policy. But again, the Western media has overwhelmingly failed to clearly spell out what Israel is actually doing. Having imposed a total siege on Gaza since March 2, Israel set up a US-backed shadow entity named the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation to explicitly supplant the UN. It hasn't just been rejected by every aid agency – even the US marine who heads it resigned on the basis it contradicted the basic principles of humanitarianism. The Foundation set three aid checkpoints in the south in an effort to concentrate Gaza's entire population into a confined area – a concentration camp. Too little aid was delivered, much of it unusable given the siege on cooking materials. But in any case, the Israeli military repeatedly fired on starving Palestinians. In the words of Tory MP Kit Malthouse, the UN system had been replaced with a 'shooting range, an abattoir'. But when the Israeli military massacred dozens of starving Palestinians, they deployed their usual strategy: deceive, deflect, deny, distort. Even though the shootings happened in an Israeli military zone, and despite the overwhelming evidence of Israeli lies, the Western media indulged Israeli claims that Hamas was responsible as if they were credible. CNN belatedly published a clear rebuttal of Israeli lies, but attention had already moved on. As ever, the Western media overall fail to allow Israeli responsibility for atrocities to stick. And yet now, even as Yair Lapid – the main opposition leader – states Netanyahu is 'giving weapons to organisations close to ISIS in Gaza', this latest plank of Israel's starvation strategy barely gets any coverage. This is despite Israel's 'Hamas is ISIS' campaign long being used to justify the genocide. This all fits a classic pattern, of course. Israel encouraged the rise of Hamas in the 1980s in order to undermine its public enemy number one at the time, Yasser Arafat's Fatah. More recently, Netanyahu worked with Qatar to transfer money to prop up Hamas – with the hope of dividing the Palestinian nation and movement so an independent state was impossible. Remember too how the West armed and backed the Mujahideen against the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s, playing a crucial role in creating the global Islamist fundamentalist movement. You would think the Western media might take an interest given the precedents. It is true that there is a shift taking place. Israeli spokespeople are suddenly being taken apart on mainstream television. Sky News is demanding the Prime Minister answer if genocide is taking place. But the media narrative still has not clearly shifted to reality – that is, a crime of historic proportions is being facilitated by Western governments, which means questions should be focused on 'how can this crime be stopped, and perpetrators held to justice' rather than 'is Israel doing something very bad here?' The latter is an improvement on where the narrative was stuck for so long – which was essentially 'Israel is waging a war of self-defence', with a side debate about whether the 'response' was 'proportionate'. What is clear is that an understanding is creeping into the political and media elites that a reckoning is coming, where those who facilitated this abomination will be forced to answer for what they did and what they didn't do. Time is running out.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Immigration warning over 'less than welcoming' statements
The tone of Sir Keir's remarks on May 12 was, as observed by Mr Sheerin and many others, surely something of a surprise. And it was unexpected even with an awareness - having covered this key issue closely over months and years - of Labour's developing and lamentable stance on immigration. The Prime Minister declared: 'Nations depend on rules – fair rules. Sometimes they're written down, often they're not, but either way, they give shape to our values. They guide us towards our rights, of course, but also our responsibilities, the obligations we owe to one another. Now, in a diverse nation like ours, and I celebrate that, these rules become even more important. Without them, we risk becoming an island of strangers, not a nation that walks forward together.' The 'island of strangers' was a striking turn of phrase. Sir Keir went on: 'So when you have an immigration system that seems almost designed to permit abuse, that encourages some businesses to bring in lower-paid workers rather than invest in our young people, or simply one that is sold by politicians to the British people on an entirely false premise, then you're not championing growth, you're not championing justice, or however else people defend the status quo. You're actually contributing to the forces that are slowly pulling our country apart.' Maybe with the benefit of hindsight the Prime Minister's remarks, even though they could have been uttered just as easily by the Tory Brexiters, should not have been quite so much of a shock as they were. After all, Labour has embraced the key elements of the Conservatives' hard Brexit: loss of free movement of people between the UK and European Economic Area nations and the ending of the frictionless trade from which the country previously benefited enormously when it was part of the single market. Nevertheless, Sir Keir's tone was surely surprisingly dismal, even given all of this. Not only did we have the reference to 'an island of strangers' but also this declaration: 'This strategy will finally take back control of our borders and close the book on a squalid chapter for our politics, our economy, and our country.' What seemed clear from Sir Keir's utterings was that populism most certainly did not end with the exit of Boris Johnson or Rishi Sunak from the prime minister post. Sir Keir's tone contrasted so starkly with Mr Sheerin's reasoned appraisal of the Prime Minister's remarks and Labour's plans on immigration. We had this from Sir Keir: 'We do have to ask why parts of our economy seem almost addicted to importing cheap labour rather than investing in the skills of people who are here and want a good job in their community. Sectors like engineering, where visas have rocketed while apprenticeships have plummeted.' You would imagine Mr Sheerin, as a veteran of the engineering sector, knows a lot more about the specifics than Sir Keir. And it is worth observing the Scottish Engineering chief executive is passionate about people in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK being trained as engineers. He would love to see the skills shortages which are posing such a challenge to member companies of Scottish Engineering and others in the sector solved. Mr Sheerin is not a politician - just someone with deep knowledge of the Scottish engineering sector. So what did the Scottish Engineering chief have to say in his quarterly report published on Friday? Read more He declared that he found the UK Government's 'latest pronouncements on immigration disappointing', highlighting the detrimental impact on companies of 'statements that feel less than welcoming'. Mr Sheerin hammered home his view that raising minimum qualification levels from Higher equivalents to degree level would 'leave out the skilled trades and crafts roles where we are already in shortest supply: welders, fabricators, electricians, pipefitters, CNC (computer numerical control) machinists to name a few'. That is surely a crucial point. And it is worth emphasising Mr Sheerin's observation that people skilled in these roles are 'already in shortest supply'. Mr Sheerin also noted: 'The shortening of the graduate visa scheme reducing the right to work from two years to 18 months after graduating will not only hit our education sector but also reduce the attractiveness of the scheme for companies who will have a shorter timeline to decide whether to invest in the process to extend the visa of the employee.' This is another good point. And the Scottish Engineering chief executive declared: 'Whilst I recognise that this [immigration] is a contentious political issue across the UK for a whole range of reasons, in engineering and manufacturing in Scotland the reality is that immigration is a vital source of skills and experience that cannot be replaced overnight. These skills levels take years to build - and we should be building them - but closing off the supply before putting in place the actions to do that is another example of an action that will challenge the stated ambition of growing our economy.' The time horizon with regard to building skills levels is important. It might not chime with that of politicians such as Sir Keir, who seems at pains to bang the drum on immigration as Nigel Farage's Reform UK makes a big noise on this front. However, it is a simple factual point that engineering skills do take years to build. Mr Sheerin declared that a frustration for him in Labour's immigration pronouncements was that 'whereas there is considerable detail on how we plan to restrict and close this supply of skills, on the laudable stated aim that we will replace the loss with trained or upskilled UK-born workers, the detail is missing on how that will be achieved'. He added: 'And there is no detail that recognises that engineering skills take between four and six years to get to a starting level of competency. It does not seem an unreasonable request for the get-well plan to carry at least the same level of detail as the take-it-away plan.' This seems like an absolutely fair summation of the problems with Labour's populist immigration proposals. If you were asked to choose whether you think it is Sir Keir or Mr Sheerin who is on the money in relation to immigration policy and its effect on engineering and the broader economy, it would surely be the easiest of questions to answer, any day of the week.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Jim Sillars: John Swinney should resign as SNP leader
Polling suggested the SNP would win the crunch by-election but instead Labour took the seat pushing the SNP into second while Reform was placed third. The result prompted calls on Friday by SNP veteran Alex Neil for Mr Swinney's resignation as leader before the Scottish Parliament elections in 2026, when the SNP will have been in power for 19 years. Speaking to The Herald Mr Sillars echoed Mr Neil's views that Mr Swinney should quit though added he did not think a change of leadership would be sufficient to put the SNP on the front foot in time for the election next May saying better delivery on public services and a review of policy priorities was needed. "Look at yesterday's result," he said. READ MORE: SNP veteran calls for Swinney to quit after Labour shock by-election victory Sarwar: Swinney ran a 'disgraceful' campaign and is running down the clock as FM Rows with press, claims of racism and misinformation - a by-election that turned ugly "The SNP went down to 29%. If that was repeated in 2026 the SNP will have a disaster on their hands, they would get nowhere near the seats they need to get and therefore not be in government. "It is very difficult to see how they can reverse their position. They are also being judged by voters on the basis of their performance in government. "They have spent more time in Holyrood arguing about the identity of women than they have about the 85,000 children living in abject poverty. Former SNP deputy leader Jim Sillars (Image: PA) "It is not just a leadership replacement they would have to rethink their whole policy priorities. They have lost the people." He noted the difference in support for independence and for the SNP. "When you get polling showing that support for independence is around 50% but the so-called party of independence is getting 29% of the vote in a critical by-election then there is a real problem," he added. "I never thought John Swinney would make a good leader. I think he should go on the basis that he is a failure, though it doesn't mean that him going would really change things substantially." Along with Mr Neil, Mr Sillars is a longstanding critic of Mr Swinney and former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon. Both were supportive of the late former First Minister Alex Salmond when he fell out with Ms Sturgeon. Turning to the First Minister's message that the by-election was a straight contest between the SNP and Reform, Mr Sillars said: "He punted Reform instead of dealing with the real opposition which was Labour. Scottish Labour's victory rally in Hamilton on Friday (Image: Colin Mearns) "It showed a man with a lack of judgment and someone who could not read the street." Former SNP health secretary Mr Neil was the first senior party figure to call for a change of leadership following the SNP by-election defeat. In a post on X on Friday Alex Neil, who held Cabinet roles in the administrations of both Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon, said it was time for a new leadership. READ MORE: Keir Starmer: John Swinney hasn't raised independence referendum with me Swinney defends claims Labour 'out of it' in by-election Not a shot that's been fired across SNP's bows, it's a cruise missile "Poor by election result for the SNP despite having the best candidate," wrote the former Cabinet minister on X. "It shows that the opinion polls appear wide of the mark. Most importantly it shows the current SNP leadership needs to be replaced urgently." Mr Sarwar and his party celebrated in the early hours of Friday morning after Labour's Davy Russell was elected as the new MSP for Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse, winning the seat from the SNP. With the votes showing a swing of more than 7% from the SNP to Labour, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said on Friday the result showed people have "voted for change". The by-election had been held following the death earlier this year of Scottish Government minister Christina McKelvie. When the votes were counted, Mr Russell polled 8,559, SNP candidate Katy Loudon took 7,957 votes, while Reform's Ross Lambie secured 7,088. And although Mr Russell was elected with fewer votes than Labour secured in the seat in the 2021 Scottish Parliament election, the SNP's support fell from just over 46% of all ballots then to 29.35% in the by-election. Reform UK deputy leader Richard Tice insisting they were "delighted" with coming third - despite speculation prior to the count that they could come in second or may even pull off a surprise victory. Speaking at a media event in Hamilton on Friday morning, Mr Sarwar accused the SNP leader of running a "disgraceful" campaign" and insisted the by-election could "help lead the way" to him becoming Scotland's next First Minister. Mr Swinney said the SNP was "clearly disappointed" with the result. The First Minister and party leader said Labour had "won by an absolute landslide" in Rutherglen and Hamilton West - noting the SNP "came much closer" this time round. But he added: "The people of Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse have made clear that we still have work to do. "Over the next few days, we will take time to consider the result fully." The SNP was approached to seek comment on the interventions from Mr Sillars and Mr Neil. Since coming into office in Spring last year Mr Swinney has attempted to refresh the SNP's policy agenda with a renewed focus on addressing child poverty and improving public services, in particular tackling waits for NHS treatment. He has attempted to steer away from the public debate on gender politics which dominated the end of Ms Sturgeon's time in office.
