16/12/2015 House of Commons

Order! Urgent question, Diana Johnson. To ask the Minister for

Public health to make a statement on plans to reform support for victory

in -- for victims of contaminated blood. The Minister for Public

health. I recognise that I have committed in earlier debates to

consult on proposals to reform the current payment schemes before the

end of the and despite our best efforts we are unfortunately not yet

ready to publish this before recess. However I can confirm today that the

consultation will be published in January. The delay I know is

disappointing for many anticipating this consultation before the end of

the year, and I want to apologise for the delay, particularly to those

Members of the house who have campaigned tirelessly for a

resolution on behalf of constituents and of course to those directly

affected to continue to wait patiently for our proposals. In the

Westminster Hall debate in September I explained that any consultation

would be within the context of the spending review and payments for the

reform scheme would come from the Department of Health budget. The

House will note that the outcome of the spending review was communicated

to us only a few weeks ago. The reform of the payment schemes

remains a priority and we are currently assessing what can be

allocated above and beyond the additional ?25,000,000 already

committed which is of course in addition to the existing baseline

spending on payment schemes which will remain. Over my 2 years as

public health minister I have regularly heard from those affected

by this tragedy, every week I read a large number of letters to me and

the Prime Minister from campaign groups and individuals and their

families. All of whom have been affected by the tragedy in different

ways. While considering proposals for consultation I want to make sure

all of the views are reflected and in particular I don't miss the

thoughts of those with quieter voices. We have arranged an

independently facilitated event with representatives of some of the

leading campaign groups and the report is available through those

groups. I have also worked to keep Members of this House updated and

you know how seriously I take my duties in this regard. Last month I

invited Members of a haemophilia group to discuss this. My intention

was to consult as soon as or but I warned this could be in January

because of the spending review. As I discussed then I'm interested in the

advent of simple and more effective treatments which have the ability to

cure some people from hepatitis C and present a welcome opportunity to

make some people well. I want to ensure this House that work

continues and consultation will be published January. At that time it

will be an oral statement. Because it is a priority for me to get this

right, I have taken the decision to take a little more time and

published a consultation in January. Your decision to grant the urgent

question today is recognition of the long campaign for justice for this

group and this is appreciated by everybody involved. I have to say to

the Minister that I'm very disappointed I have had to ask for

this urgent question today, ministers on three occasions

promised a statement before Christmas, and they should not have

been forced to come to the Chamber for the second time this year. I

issue when the minister talks about the consultation being issued in

January, she means January 2016, I would like clarification because

dates always seemed to slip. Search action by the Government fuels

distrust the people who have been let down for too long and I would

like to ask four questions. The Minister is proposing a consultation

of 12 weeks which she will need to assess before launching a new

scheme. Can she explain how this is now feasible before the start of the

next financial year? Secondly the minister claimed it would be the

first full public consultation and I want to press upon the Minister that

the APPG ran a full consultation with the same people earlier this

year, so can the Minister assure me that she has considered the report

and all of the evidence presented in it? Thirdly, as the Minister said,

the Government delayed making a statement until after the spending

review in order to determine the total financial envelope available.

I understand that currently the Department of Health pays out ?40

million a year with a total future financial commitment of ?455

million. Can the Prime Minister tell the house how much more is now

available after the comprehensive spending review? Fourthly, lump-sum

payments were a key issue raised in response to the APPG enquiry but it

now appears to be off the agenda. This is a major disappointment.

Lump-sum payments allow bowlers affected to make real choices about

their own lives, something they have been denied for far too long. --

allowed it to have been affected. Could we use funds equivalent to the

funds raised from the sale of plasma resources UK to fund lump-sum

payments to those affected? I thank the honourable lady for her

response. Of course I understand the disappointment that we are not able

to consult before the end of the year and I did of course inform the

honourable lady and her colleagues at the meeting on the 5th of

November at that time that it was unlikely we would be able to consult

before the end of the and it was recorded in the note that they made

at the meeting as published in the all-party group. I have tried to

keep colleagues informed and only last night I was speaking to a

number of campaigners about this. The Honourable Member for Foil and

Cove Valley. I was going to inform the honourable lady today or

tomorrow and all of the other Members so I have done my best to

keep people informed. I understand her point about the consultation. I

will look at the point is that she makes but I have always been clear

that the transition to a new scheme, and this is something we discussed

at the meeting in early November, any transition to a new scheme has

to be done in a way that does not compromise the safety of payments to

people in the schemes, and therefore I don't see any problem with the

issue of consulting and then moving towards a transition because the

transition would be a gradual process anyway for some people. I

want to ensure a safe transfer from the current scheme to any reform

scheme. I don't see a real problem in that regard. This will be the

first full consultation by the Government and she is right that the

all-party group and others, my right honourable friend sat on the

Treasury bench, of course gun at many views. It will be the first

full Government consultation but of course all views including those put

to the all-party group in their good report, those can be reiterated as

part of the response to the consultation. I have made a

statement already about the issue of money in my response to the urgent

question. I understand the point she makes about lump-sum payments, it

would not be appropriate to comment at that time and I could talk about

it more when I make an oral statement at the time of the

consultation launch. The principle that she reiterated in her questions

about individual choice and treating people as individuals, the important

principle that many Members have stressed to me, that is something we

will very much recognised in what we put forward in the New Year. Jason

McCartney. I would like to congratulate the honourable lady

from Hull North who I co-chaired the group with for securing this urgent

question. Can I also press the Minister to please use this valuable

data that we had in the all-party report. It has real testimony from

victims in how the trusts and funds, are just not delivering the support

day-to-day that victims actually need, and when she comes back to the

housing January, please can it be as soon as and not the last day when we

then maybe have to go to another urgent question? Well, Mr Speaker,

my honourable friend has campaigned very long and hard and very well on

this is quite right to reiterate the importance of the views given to

that report and they have already informed our thinking and I can

confirm that. About how we go forward, and so have the views of

many colleagues on all sides of the house, expressed over many months

and years. I can give him that assurance that it will be considered

and I have previously committed and I will reiterate that today, to a

root and branch reform of current schemes. Thank you for granting this

urgent question and I pay tribute to all the Members of this House who

have been strong voices for the victims of contaminated blood. In

particular to my honourable friend the Member for Hull North who has

been tireless in her pursuit of answers. This scandal saw thousands

of people died and thousands of families destroyed through the

negligence of public bodies. Over the years, the response of

governments of all colours just hasn't been good enough. It is a

real shame that we are here yet again, wondering why action has been

taken. Whilst I don't think anybody doubt this and Sarah Deal of the

commitment that the Prime Minister made back in April, can the Minister

understand the disappointment people have felt in recent months as

promises to publish arrangements and to make statements have been

repeatedly broken? Does she accept that this has only raised false hope

among a community that already feels very betrayed? Given this further

delay that she has announced today, what guarantees do we have that the

January consultation date will be met and what redress other than an

urgent question through you, Mr Speaker, will there be if it isn't?

And the consultation is fine but can she say when any new scheme will

actually be implemented? It is important that any new arrangements

are properly scrutinised, so will she commit to a debate in Government

time to allow that to happen? And finally, does the public health

Minister appreciate that the longer this goes on, the longer we leave in

place a system which isn't working, and leaves victims without adequate

support. No amount of money can ever fully make up for what happened, but

we do owe those still living with the consequences the dignity of a

full, final, fair, and lasting settlement. This in Justice has gone

on for far too long. The time for action is now. Mr Speaker I have

already said that of course I regret the delay but this is a very complex

area and I appreciate the tone in which the shadow public health

minister responded because as he said, governments of all colours

have not turned to this issue but we have and we are addressing it in a

great deal of detail. It is a complex area with a diverse range of

groups affected by this tragedy and we must get the consultation right

for all of them and we are considering the funding issue and I

have been clear about that in my response to the urgent question. Of

course we are aware for the potential of litigation as it stands

but I can't comment further. The House will appreciate that it adds

complexity to the matter. Mr Speaker, I have always been happy to

come to the House to explain, the issue of debates in Government time

are not a matter for me but I have been delighted to not only debate

this but to talk to colleagues including the shadow front bench

privately or otherwise on this matter. That commitment remains.

Chloe Smith. Carneiro cope the spirit of this debate today and say

we need to do this job fast and well. Can I highlight the tragic

circumstances of some of those affected such as a constituent of

mine who has got even more ill as we have been debating even these fine

details, there is no more time to lose. That point is well made and

very much on my mind. When I am able to say more about the shape of the

proposed reform scheme I hope my honourable friend will see that we

have tried to respond to her concerns and those of many other

honourable and right honourable Members. Philippa Whitford.

Obviously the Penrose in cry -- enquiry was held in Scotland. The

Prime Minister made her statement about the 25 million transitional

payment. These people are awaiting a final settlement and compensation

for what the NHS did. Their suffering goes on and it was made,

the statement that the transitional payment would be in this financial

year, to help these people get to that settlement, so while the

consultation is on the final arrangement, we need some action

now, so people need to have access to the new drugs, Scottish

Government have written about support for fuel payments and we

have to have the transition now and it should not be kicked into the

long grass. This certainly hasn't been kicked into the long grass and

I have said today that we will consult in January and that is my

intention. The honourable lady speaks about compensation, I have

said this before but I think it is again worth saying this from the

dispatch box, while we are working to establish a fair resolution

liability has not been established in the majority of cases so it is

not appropriate to talk about compensation payments particularly

on the scale that some campaigners and colleagues envisage and I have

been open about that for many months. She is right to make the

point about treatments and all of those things which are part of our

considerations as we move forward. I would like to confirm to the house

that although it was allocated to be spent in this financial year it will

be carried forward and the money that the Prime Minister announced in

March was to support the transition of the scheme and as we envisage the

scheme transitioning in the spring next year following a consultation,

that money will support that. But that money will be carried forward.

Can I congratulate the Honourable Member for Hull North for securing

this question. I am speaking today on behalf of a constituent, Steve

Diamond, who has hepatitis C as a result of contaminated blood

products. Although he is in remission, and normal life for him

is quite impossible. I know that there are new drugs and treatments

available, can the Minister ensure me that those advanced treatments

will be available to sufferers without restriction? What we need is

closure and I hope despite this delay that the closure can be very

shortly delivered. This is a big subject in my part of Kent, it is

trailed massively by the Kent on Sunday and we need closure and those

affected needs certainty, can the Minister assure me of that? I have

corresponded directly with Mr Diamond's partner and I know the

level of suffering that he enjoys. -- he in doers -- he suffers. There

is a very real threat of hepatitis C infection, and it is something

uppermost in my mind as I look at how to report the scheme and support

those who suffer. This comes after the shambles of the

meeting in the Minister 's department last month. When

honourable Members from both sides of the house arrived and after

waiting were told that the meeting was over. And then received an

apology from an official promising further information which was never

supplied. Does the honourable lady understand what being a minister is?

It means being in charge, it means only making a promise if you are

certain that you will keep the promise. This has been a travesty

and it would not matter so much if it were not for the sick people,

including those in my constituency, who are living lives in hell,

looking to the Government after the promises were made for some kind of

alleviation during their lifetimes and they haven't got it. I slightly

regret the tone that the right-armer gentleman takes. I have to say that

I am totally mystified about the point he makes about the meeting

which was organised with the all-party group with the right

honourable lady's colleague and I think it may have been moved once at

the request of the all-party group and the details and arrangements

were circulated by the all-party group. Six honourable and right

honourable colleagues attended the meeting, so I'm sorry if there was

some confusion, but I don't think it was on the part of me or my

officials and a number of colleagues came to the meeting and we had a

useful discussion and I have sought to update others since. He is right

that we need to move towards a conclusion but it's also a matter of

record that he was at times a Member of the last Labour Government which

for 13 years did not move forward on this matter. The Minister will be

aware of my frustrations when dealing with the McFarlane trust,

she has the weight of evidence from a consultation that that particular

trust is not fit for purpose. Can I ask her to confirm that any final

settlement will not be administered by the McFarlane trust? Bryan Ferry

well aware of the shortcomings -- I am very well aware of shortcomings

in relation to some of the schemes and that aspect of things, and I

have confirmed before that reform of the schemes looking at that sort of

thing, to make sure we don't have so many schemes, all of that will be

part of the consultation so I can confirm that that point is very well

made. I would add further record, Mr Speaker, that I met recently with

the staff of the schemes, the people actually manning the phones and deal

on a day to day, week to week basis with sufferers and I'm quite clear

that those Members of staff, distinct perhaps from people... Or

whatever, those people are offering a good service to people in

difficult circumstances. Isn't this one of those situations where there

is an absolute moral obligation on the Government to act and end this

uncertainty and delay? Is she reassured that the spending review

gives her the ability to bring a lasting and fair settlement and will

she do everything that she can to ensure that it is in place at the

start of the next financial year? I am very happy to give my former

colleague in the Department of Health reassurance that this is

taken extremely seriously by the Secretary of State, my colleagues at

the Department of Health, it is a matter on which we are seeking to

move forward. It will be for those who respond to the consultation and

the reform scheme to give their views and we are seeking to move

forward to a reform scheme that responds to the criticisms of the

existing schemes and offers sustainability for people who have

suffered so long. I hope I can satisfy him in that regard. I will

be able to say more in the New Year when we published the scheme and

details. One of my constituents is trying to access a drug and that is

proving difficult because she has not contracted cirrhosis but has an

underlying medical condition which is exacerbated by contaminated

blood. Much is being reported about greater access as of February. Is

this the case and will she be able to access the treatment that she

desperately needs? I would love a yes or no answer because this is

very frustrating. I could never give a yes or no answer to an individual

health problems, I don't know the constituent and I'm not a clinician

but if the Honourable Member would like to write to me I can certainly

make sure I give an individual response. Ultimately the right

clinical route will be at the suggestion of their consultant.

Obviously Nice published new guidelines on new drug treatments,

so the landscape in terms of hepatitis C is changing rapidly. As

I say I'm very happy to make sure that honourable Members are fully

informed. I said before in a previous debate on this issue that

if people are concerned that their constituents are not aware of what

is out there and don't feel they are getting support to access things in

line with Nice guidance, then we can offer some advice two Members to

make sure that happens but I'm well aware of the general point that he

makes. Catherine West. Can the Minister clarify for individuals

affected by this scandal, that they will receive individualised letters

and how will they know that the consultation is opening next month?

Obviously my officials have been giving considerable thought about

how to do that. A number of people are already Members with existing

schemes and we have a means to communicate but we know from

previous experience following up on recommendations made by previous

enquiries and indeed the recommendation made by the Penrose

enquiry, we are making exhaustive efforts to ensure everybody,

particularly those who have had a lump sum payment, we will make

exhaustive efforts to inform people by every means possible and of

course Members of Parliament can be of great assistance.

Going back to the issue of medication, drugs that are available

that have not yet been approved but can be prescribed are not being

prescribed locally on financial grounds, surely, that is wholly

unacceptable. The NHS is currently looking at its response to the most

recent verdict, 25th of November, so fiercely, we have that yet to come

in terms of the new treatment, the previous treatments that have

already been given a nice guideline is that the NHS has commissioning

arrangements in place. We may be able to give some helpful

support. Conversation is important but the

important issue, it was health-related, INAUDIBLE

My officials are working very closely with all the devolved

administrations, and obviously, as we move towards publication of the

consultation, I would be looking to do that. I know the Minister will

appreciate the frustration that constituents of mine have been

waiting for an outcome for some decades and there will be another

delay, given the Commons that have been made about transition funding,

then you give a clearer idea of when you think the new system is going to

be in place. We aim to consult, we want to make sure that the final

shape of the reform scheme is informed by the consultation, before

I have said that we will be looking to transition to another reform

scheme in spring. The minister wrote to me on the

fifth of the Pemba, the shape and structure of the new scheme is going

to be decided following the consultation process that will begin

by the end of this year. As previously committed and as was

committed in the adjournment be it on the 9th of September. I'm deeply

disappointed that we do not have that scheme or that consultation. My

constituent, Brian Carbery, from Southdown, with whom I had the

adjournment debate about, has told me in the last few weeks, that he

has now got a form of cancer, and four tumours have been identified as

a result of the connection with contaminated blood is. Will the

minister give me an undertaking, given undertaking to the house today

that a full and final settlement will be in place before the end of

this financial year? I have already made my comments about the timing of

the consultation, I cannot add to what I have already said. I have

spoken often in debates. I think that the language she uses is

language that previous to this exchange I have said, I have said

what I have said about the issue of compensation, I have talked about

the principles we will try to apply, and so I cannot add to the comments

that I made in response. Could I challenge the Minister on the

phrase, " quieter voices", it seems to be code for addressing the

important but less costly issues of treatment and reform of the current

scheme. Rather than a full and final settlement to what Lord Winston

rightly called the worst treatment disaster in history of the NHS, we

have moral duty, I'm just saying that the chance to give the money

will not wash. Again, I have made that point, I have said already

coming here today, I have said, previously in Westminster Hall, what

the position is in regard to compensation, I accept that the

honourable member has a different view, we had an exchange about that

when he came to contribute to the discussion in November, I think that

it would be wrong to use the phrase to dismiss the idea of listening to

quieter voices, I have had the opportunity to do that, over the

last couple of years, and it is clear that there is a number of

people who want a number of different things from a reform

scheme, it is not going to be possible to do everything that

everyone is. We are going to respond as best we can with a scheme that is

sustainable and fair to all, and that is what has happened with many

of the points made here today. I thank the honourable member to bring

in this question, I had a constituent only on Friday at my

surgery who wanted to raise the issue on this topic and she will do

most disappointed that there was further delay, could I ask the

Minister, if she has not done this already, take up the issue of

continued to have assessments for the DWP, she feels it is strenuous

that she has to continue to prove her case to qualify for benefits and

she cannot be unique in the country among this, she found the treatment

she found at the hands of the NHS was not the most sensitive, she

wishes some gains could be issued on that for health care professionals.

-- some guidance. Thank you for your comments, I will reflect upon them,

obviously matters for the DWP are outside of the remit for the

Department of Health but those general issues are points I will

take on board and can refer to colleagues on. As I have said, we

continue to work with the administrations on this, matters for

the NHS, assuming that her constituent is treated in Scotland,

that is a devolved matter for the Scottish NHS. Apologise for the

forthright tone, but my constituent affected simply wants to be able to

buy a home to secure for his family, not available to them. Can I tell my

constituent that next year, there should be a new scheme in place and

she will be eligible to receive support? It is clearly my intention

that next year we should have a reform scheme in place, I do not

know the circumstances of the constituents I cannot make that emit

more. We want to move to a reform scheme, I understand the frustration

of members opposite, but as I think the gentleman speaking for the

public health minister acknowledged, governments of all descriptions and

all shades have not stood up and tackled this issue, and we are going

to try to do something, it will not satisfy everyone, but I hope that we

will be able to come forward with a scheme that will respond to the

concerns of many people. I think the member for holding all, for raising

this question, the Minister may recall, the meeting I attended on

the 5th of November, things to discuss, the setting up of a

contingency fund rather than relying on the spending review, because you

confirm she has went to the Treasury, and secondly, will the

consultation consider loved ones who have been lost because of this. I

have already covered the issue of funding in my statement in response,

the honourable member came to the meeting, and we considered a number

of things, there are, and discuss them. I do not think I can add to

what I have already said, this is a priority for the Department of

Health and we are seeking to identify the amount of money on top

of the transitional 25 million and on top of the baseline spent on the

current scheme, that we can use in supporting the reform scheme. 6000

infected, 2000 dead, 30 year struggle, this delay is one part of

the continuing nightmare that these victims face. Can the Minister tell

my constituents, Fred Bates and Peter Moxham and, when this

nightmare will come to an end? I cannot right the wrongs of 30 years

but I can only try and do what I can do in the circumstances that we

have, in the money that we will allocate to this, we will bring

forward the plans for reform schemes, and I invite him and his

constituent to respond to that, looking to the future, we have to

look at what we can do going forward to support people and how we can

respond to some of the circumstances which are new, some of the ways in

which the circumstances that we address the terrible difficult

tragedy in some of the ways in which the circumstances have changed and

make sure that our response reflects the new changed circumstances. The

Minister may recall that when the all-party group met her in early

November, we warned that any slippage on this would be greeted as

slipperiness, by people who have suffered delays too long. Does she

understand that people will be worried, that the extra time has

been taken to make sure there is a more controlled consultation with

options being sealed off, and would she address the underlying question

that people want to ask, if liability can be admitted by the

Irish health service, based on the fact that the risk was known, can

liability not be admitted on the part of the NHS and compensation be

forthcoming? Payments that were made by the Republic of Ireland are a

matter for them, they were in response to the circumstances in

Ireland related to the roots of blood products. -- use. I understand

the frustration, I spoke with him last night informally to alert into

the fact that there was some delay. I reiterate, it is better to come

forward with a scheme where we have had a chance to put more effort and

more detail around, rather than for the sake of a few weeks, rush out

something that does not give anybody any real sense of what is being

consulted on, the delay, although frustrating, and I have acknowledged

that a number of times, although frustrating, it will give rise to a

better and more meaningful consultation. The victims are

clearly identified and well overdue a final settlement, weeks ago, in

this chamber, I asked the government if they would provide additional

support for victims through this winter, it may be mild here but it

is not mild everywhere, many are suffering from fuel poverty. Given

the ever stretching time that this is taking to resolve, will the

Minister now committed to providing that support? She has been asked by

the Scottish Government to do that, will she commits to it now? This

matter has been raised with me either health Minister, from

Scotland, I intend to respond in the next few days. I know that the

Northern Ireland and Welsh administrations are considering

this, and have not fed back to me. I did raise it with the members who

attended the all-party group meeting in early November, there was not the

time, relatively limited interest in the proposal but I will respond in

the next couple of days. Secretary Philip Hammond. With the

mission I wish to make a statement to update the house on the campaign

against Daesh in Iraq and Syria. Two weeks ago this house voted for the

extension of UK air strikes against Daesh into the heartland in Syria.

As the Prime Minister and I set out during the debate, this extension of

military strikes is just one part of the strategy to bring stability to

Iraq and Syria, by defeating lame -- by defeating Daesh, and it has

been welcomed by international partners, including the United

States, and France and other partners in Europe and the Gulf.

During the debate we committed to update the house quarterly on the

progress of the strategy, but given the high level of interest expressed

by honourable members during the debate, I decided to offer an early

first update before the house rises this week. Turning first to the

military strand of the strategy, as is well-known, the first RAF air

strikes against Daesh in Syria were conducted just a few hours after the

vote in this house, successfully targeting oil facilities in eastern

Syria, which provide an important source of illicit income to Daesh.

Instead, RAF aircraft have conducted further strikes against Daesh in

Syria, targeting wellheads in the extensive Omar oilfields, and

conducting reconnaissance and surveillance missions. To enable

this increased tempo of activity, a further two RAF tornadoes and six

typhoons have been deployed to RAF Akrotiri, in Cyprus, ringing the

total number of manned aircraft conducting strikes to 16, in

addition to the RAF Reaper unmanned aircraft, also deployed in the

region. During the debate on the second, a number of honourable and

right honourable members expressed concern about the possibility of

civilian casualties resulting from British military action, and of

course, there is a risk involved in any kind of combat strike activity.

It continues to be the case that we have had no reports of civilian

casualties as a result of UK air strikes in Iraq or Syria, and I pay

tribute to the precision and professionalism of the RAF pilots in

conducting these operations. In Iraq, government forces continue to

make progress against Daesh. Operations began in autumn 2014 and

since then, the strategically significant times of Tikrit and

others have all been retaken. To the west of Baghdad, it is now

supported, supported by US mentors, and Daesh occupies are being

squeezed, including by RAF close support. The work is well advanced

in building a sunny local police force, supported by local tribal

forces, so that they can hold and police the city once it is

liberated. In total, RAF tornadoes and Reaper drones have flown more

than 1600 missions over Iraq. -- Sunni. Conducting over 400 strikes.

In Syria, the situation is more complicated. The majority of Russian

air strikes continue to target Syrian opposition forces rather than

Daesh, in the last two weeks, the Russians have attacked opposition

forces between Homs and Aleppo, and in the far north of Syria, in doing

so, they have allowed Daesh to seek advantage on the ground, with

coalition partners, including the United States, we will continue to

urge the Russians at every opportunity to focus fire solely on

Daesh. It is unacceptable that Russian action is weakening the

opposition, and thus giving advantage to the very Daesh forces

they claim to being gauged against. Turning now to the campaign to

disrupt the finances and stop the flow of foreign fighters, as well as

targeting oil assets, which experts estimate account for 40% of Daesh

revenues, my right honourable friend the Chancellor will tomorrow attend

the first ever meeting of finance ministers at the Security Council in

New York, to agree a further strengthening of the UN sanctions

regime against Daesh. It is also crucial that country is strictly in

force sanctions with appropriate investigations and prosecutions. And

to ensure that we have our own house in order, we have begun the review

ordered by my right honourable friend the Prime Minister into

funding of Islamist extremist activity in the UK. It will report

to the Prime Minister in the spring. We continue to work with Turkey and

others to build an increasingly sophisticated network to interdict

foreign fighters seeking to enter Syria. Alongside money, Daesh relies

heavily on propaganda, to attract financial support and new recruits.

And so we have stepped up efforts to counter their messaging. The UK has

created a coalition communication cell, which is working to combat and

undermine the Daesh brand, ensuring that no communication space

currently exploited by Daesh is left uncontested, generating a full range

of innovations at a pace and scale necessary to highlight the cruel and

inhumane treatment of individuals under its control by Daesh, the

failures on the battlefield, and its perversion of Islam. It has already

received staffing and financial contributions from coalition

partners, and others have expressed strong support and an intention to

contribute in the future. At the heart of our comprehensive strategy,

a recognition that to defeat Daesh in its heartland, we need a

political track to bring an end to the Civil War, and to have in place

a transitional government in Syria. The world can then once again

support a legitimate Syrian government, so that the Syrian army,

Syrian opposition forces and Kurdish Peshmerga can concentrate efforts

against Daesh, liberating their own country from this evil organisation.

Diplomatic efforts to deliver a negotiated end to the Civil War and

a transitional government are continuing apace. International

Syria support group, bringing together all the major international

players, has agreed the need for a ceasefire, humanitarian access, and

an end to attacks on civilians. In its communique, November 14, the ISS

G-7 out its goals: transitional government within six months, new

constitution, and new internationally supervised elections

within 18 months. -- ISSG set out its goals. I further meeting is

expected to take place in New York on Friday, I shall attend. In

preparation I met the Foreign Minister 's of like-minded members

of the ISSG in Paris on Monday, including the US, France, Germany,

Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Separately, in Riyadh, last week, Saudi Arabia

brought together well over 100 representatives from a wide range of

Syrian opposition groups, to agree an opposition negotiating commission

and a negotiating policy statement, ahead of talks between the Syrian

opposition and the Syrian regime, convened by the UN, which we hope

will begin in January. The conference committed to Syria's

territorial integrity, to the continuity of the Syrian state, and

negotiations under the framework of the Geneva communique. It also...

The participants also committed themselves to, and I quote, a

democratic mechanism through a pluralistic system representing all

spectrums of the Syrian people, men and women, without discrimination or

exclusion, on a religious, sectarian or ethnic basis, and based on the

principles of citizenship, human rights, transparency, and

accountability, and the rule of law over everyone. Given the diversity

of the Syrian opposition, I regard that as a significant achievement

and I congratulate Saudi Arabia on it. The UK will continue to provide

full support to interest Syrian negotiations. In Iraq we continue to

support the Prime Minister, to deliver the reform reconciliation

needed to unite all of the communities in the fight against

Daesh. -- intra-Syrian. I also welcome the recent announcement of

the formation of an Islamic military coalition to fight terrorism,

bringing together 34 Muslim countries to partner with the rest

of the international community. I have discussed this initiative in

detail with my Saudi counterpart, the Foreign Minister, it's clear

intention is the creation of a coalition which is flexible,

contributing on a case-by-case basis to defend moderate Islamic from the

forces of extremism. Finally, turning to the need for continued

humanitarian support and post-conflict stabilisation in both

Syria and Iraq, as the Prime Minister outlined to the house again

today at prime ministers questions, the end of the Civil War in Syria

and the defeat of Daesh in both Iraq and Syria will present the

International immunity with an enormous and urgent stabilisation

challenge. Building on our humanitarian support to the Syria

crisis in which we remain the second largest bilateral donor, we have

committed a minimum of ?1 billion to Syria's reconstruction in the

long-term, and in February, the Prime Minister will co-host, with

Germany, Kuwait, Norway and the UN, an international donor conference

here in London focused on meeting by the United Nations's 2016 appealed

to support refugees from 04, as well as longer-term financial commitment.

-- refugees from Civil War. Since the house took the decision to weeks

ago to send military efforts into Syria, the government is taken

forward with coalition partners, a comprehensive strategy to degrade

and ultimately defeat Daesh, we are making steady progress in Iraq and

Syria, targeting finances through military action and action with

international partners, disrupting the flow of foreign fighters, we are

fighting their ideology and their propaganda. We are a leading player

in the diplomatic effort to deliver a political settlement to end the

Syrian Civil War. And we are preparing for the day after that

settlement, and the defeat of Daesh, so that we can ensure the long-term

future stability and security of Iraq and Syria. The fight against

Daesh will not be won overnight, but however long it takes, it is in our

vital national interest to defeat this terrorist organisation, and the

direct threat that it poses to our national security. Failure is not an

option. I commend this statement to the house. Diana Johnson. I would

like to begin by passing on the apologies of my right honourable

friend, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, who is unable to respond

to this statement because he is an ever visit to the occupied

Palestinian Territories and Israel and I would also like to thank the

Foreign Secretary for the courtesy extended to me by his office and for

updating the house before recess. The scale of the humanitarian

catastrophe stemming from the Civil War in Syria is almost too great

comprehends, the death toll is over 250,000 people, millions of men,

women and children will spend this Christmas as refugees, living in

tense in the Lebanon and Turkey, and in Europe, in Greece, Serbia and

Calais, even after all the brutality we have seen over the last four

years, the situation continues to deteriorate. This week, there were

the appalling reports that Daesh will murder children who have Down's

syndrome. The international community have failed the people of

Syria, we must now do everything we can to address the situation. I want

to turn first of all to the military aspect of the UK strategy, I note

that the UK military action up until now has focused firstly an economic

infrastructure, particularly oil, which is so key to financing Daesh,

and secondly, on alleviating the pressure of the Kurdish Peshmerga

forces operating in Syria. It is notable that the Foreign Secretary

did not mention action to support other moderate forces in Syria. So

can the Foreign Secretary update the house on what progress the

government have made, in identifying and co-ordinated with such forces? I

note that the Foreign Secretary stated that there has been no

casualties, said civilian casualties, resulting from UK

military action in Iraq and Syria, can the Foreign Secretary outlined

to the house the steps taken before a strike is all the right, to

minimise civilian casualties, and then after a strike is occurred,

are investigated. I want to pay are investigated. I want to pay

tribute to the outstanding bravery and professionalism of the British

military personnel, who have carried out these early missions. When we

all return to our constituencies over the Christmas break and return

to our families, these brave men and women will be continuing to serve

our country in difficult and dangerous circumstances, for this,

they deserve our unflinchingly admiration and respect. Of course,

as the opposition have consistently argued, military action could only

ever be part of the package of measures needed to defeat Daesh and

end the civil War, the overriding priority has got to be supporting a

diplomatic agreement, which unites the elements opposed to Daesh within

Syria and paves the way for the departure of Asha al-Assad, the

first step to this is agreement between the Sunni factions opposed

to both Bashar al-Assad and Daesh, and I do note the approach in

Riyadh. There has been speculation about the talks, can you inform the

house how the talks that were invited to attend the talks were

selected, and did the UK make representations to the Saudis as to

who should be invited and in particular, were the Kurdish groups

such as the Syrian Democratic forces and the Democratic union party

present at the talks? It has been reported that the Salafist group --

that they Salafist group has pulled out of talks last week and were

opposed to any peace talks with Bashar al-Assad. It was later

reported they had signed the agreement, could the Foreign

Secretary confirmed the correct position. This group has an

estimated 20,000 fighters, can the Foreign Secretary confirmed whether

those 20,000 form part of the 70,000 figure the government previously

cited as being moderate forces opposed to Bashar al-Assad and

Daesh. The key test of the Riyadh agreement will be whether it

facilitates meaningful peace talks and a ceasefire, as outlined in the

second Vienna conference, and I am pleased that the Foreign Secretary

is optimistic about the possibility for these talks. Can the Foreign

Secretary confirmed, following the Riyadh agreement, the Syrian

opposition will have a common position and a single representative

at these talks, or whether there will be distinct factions

represented. The original timetable for the possible cessation of

facilities was from January one, does the Foreign Secretary still

feel that is achievable? Was there a clear commitment to this timetable

from all of the parties present at the Syria talks in Paris on Monday.

With so many different parties to the Syrian Civil War maintaining a

ceasefire will be extremely complex, as the government explored the

possibility of a UN resolution, reinforcing the outline agreement,

including the ceasefire, agreed at the second conference, and can the

government confirm whether they will seek a resolution to confirm any

agreement which is reached between Syrian opposition forces and Bashar

al-Assad. Finally, I want to return to the humanitarian response and the

millions of refugees in tense this Christmas, in the Lebanon, nearly

one in four of the population is a recent refugee from Syria, Jordan is

hosting more than 1 million Syrian refugees, around 340,000 refugees

have been resettled in Germany, and just this week, we saw the Canadian

Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, welcoming the first of 35,000

refugees to be settled in Canada, by refugees to be settled in Canada, by

next October. I was pleased to hear, in prime ministers questions today,

that the 1000 refugees that the government had promised to resettle

will be here in the UK by Christmas. I am grateful to the honourable lady

and she is right to highlight yet another recent example of Daesh's

cruelty. There is nothing that this organisation is not capable of,

frankly. She asks about the focus of UK military activity and it's

important to emphasise that we don't do this independently as a national

contingent, we operate as part of a coalition. Our aircraft are assigned

to the coalition air operations command which tasks them to whatever

task needs doing at the time, and this can quite literally be aircraft

being diverted to provide close air support to forces on the ground

engaged in an action. She asks about UK support for moderate forces and

I'm slightly confused by the question because the proposition put

before this House two weeks ago was clear and narrow, it was about

conducting air strikes against Daesh in Syria. It was not about

intervening in the Civil War between the moderate opposition and regime

forces. Different Members of the house may have different views about

the wisdom of taking such action but at the moment we are very clear,

that is not what the UK is engaged in doing. I should just clarify that

she said I had said in my statement that there were no civilian

casualties and I can't of course make that statement, what I said was

civilian casualties arising from UK civilian casualties arising from UK

air strikes. She asked me about what steps we take to minimise the risk

of casualties. The RAF of course has very strict rules of engagement

among the strictest of any air force in the world. The Defence Secretary

explained to the House that he has created structures which give a

higher degree of direct control over targeting decisions. And we use

standard Nato procedures for analysing battle damage and dealing

with any allegations of civilian casualties or collateral damage. I

am grateful to her for her acknowledgement of the commitment of

our 800 military personnel in theatre and her recognition of the

sacrifice that their families in particular will be making this

Christmas, spending it with out their loved ones who are on active

service. Of course this military action is part of a comprehensive

strategy and we all understand in this House that we will not resolve

the situation by military action alone and the talks were an

important step forward. It was the Saudi Arabians that brought the

opposition together using their convening power, the convening power

of the King of Saudi Arabia as the guardian of the two holy mosques, no

one could have done that. We now have a new opposition grouping

including a large number of representatives of the armed

opposition on the ground, and that is a significantly more legitimate

body than previous representatives of the opposition which have tended

to represent oppositionists who are outside the country and who are not

directly engaged in the fighting. In answer to the direct question, the

UK and other partners in coalition provided the Saudis with lists,

suggestions of who should be included and ultimately it was their

decision about who was included in the invitation. She asked me about

the curious question of Ara Asham because there is ambiguity, they

attended the conference and signed the declaration but they left before

the end. They have now signed the declaration and we take them to be

bound by the commitments made in the declaration. And for clarity, the

70,000 opposition figure, opposition fighters figure we have used does

not include that force. They are not extremists like al-Nusra or Daesh,

they are not Democrats in the sense of the free Syrian army so we don't

include them in the figure. She said I was optimistic about talks but I

have to say that I am under no illusion that we are still having a

huge chasm to bridge between ourselves on one hand and the

Russians and Iranians on the other about the future of Bashar al-Assad.

That will be an issue for many oppositionists engaging in the

process. In terms of Syrian opposition unity the convening power

of Saudi Arabia can do a great deal to deliver that and the conference

was a great step forward but no one should imagine that there will be

disagreements within the Syrian opposition even as they confront the

Syrian regime in face-to-face talks. -- that there won't be

disagreements. She asks about the ceasefire and it remains the clear

intention of the US Secretary of State John Kerry to try to get

agreement on Friday in New York to a ceasefire. Frankly, that will be

highly challenging but I commend him for his ambition. We are also

holding this meeting in New York on Friday rather than Vienna

specifically to be able to go immediately to the United Nations

Security Council if it becomes clear during the morning that it is

possible to reach an agreement that the Russians will not veto in the UN

Security Council, so there is a possibility, but I would put it no

higher than that that Friday's meeting will end with a UN Security

Council resolution. I join her in commending the extraordinary effort

and sacrifice of the people of Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey in

providing refuge to so many of those fleeing the chaos in Syria, and

taking on this burden on asked and without fanfare, not just over the

last few months but for many years. -- without being asked. May I join

the opposition in welcoming the Foreign Secretary's update to the

House and join him in congratulating the Saudi Arabians for their success

last week in assembling opposition groups. Canellas Kim in relation to

Ara Asham, what progress has there been on the Jordanian task of

identifying Islamist groups in standing outside the whole

negotiation process between the Syrian Government and opposition

forces? Also there have been long-standing disturbing reports of

Turkish action or inaction on the Turkish Syrian border that has

served to aid Daesh. Now that he has identified them as a like-minded

Member of coalition, what doubts does he have that action is not in

the interest of Daesh on the border? And in regards to Iraq he referred

to a Sunni police force for Ramadi, what progress has there been around

and around Anbar? On the Jordanian process the Strand attempting to

identify who should be considered terrorists, I spoke with my

Jordanian counterpart on Monday evening and this work is

progressing, all parties have fared in their views about Navas number of

groups and the Jordanians are seeking to distinguish groups that

have a significant number of fighters from those that are

literally two dozen people and crossed referencing those partners.

This is a work in progress. On the Turkish Syrian border I met

yesterday with the US special envoy Brett McGurk, the successor to

General John Alan and we spoke about the issue. He tells me that there

are clear signs on the ground that the Turks are moving, now, to close

the border in this 60 odd mile gap that remains open at the moment and

that is very good news. On the question of the Iraqi National

Guard, as my honourable friend knows, the legislation to create a

National Guard which we regard as very important, is bogged down in

the Iraqi parliament and it is precisely for that reason that the

pragmatic approach of creating an armed local police as a ground

holding mechanism in the absence of the ability to create a National

Guard has been taken. Alex Salmond. Can I thank the Foreign Secretary

for his statement and say that UK forces in theatre carry the

admiration and support of these benches. On three aspects can the

Foreign Secretary tell us more? I welcome the new initiatives on

finance and information and propaganda. The Foreign Secretary

said that the Chancellor was going to the first ever meeting of finance

ministers and Security Council to pursue the Security Council

resolutions? Doesn't it speak volumes that it is the first meeting

to tackle the flows of finance, the financial institutions, the arms

dealers, without whom Daesh would not move a muscle or fire a shot?

Can the Foreign Secretary sure this House that after so long of waiting

for initiatives in this direction these will be pursuit as vigorously

as other parts of the tactics? The communication cell that the Foreign

Secretary announced had been established, can he tell us how many

people and how much money at our -- how much money are being used to

counteract the propaganda of Daesh? Given the extraordinary cost of

military action it would be nice to have the comparison of what is spent

militarily and what is spent on countering poisonous propaganda. On

the subject of civilian casualties, the Foreign Secretary says, and it

is welcome across the Chamber, that there are no reported casualties of

UK action in Syria. Of course he'll zone knows that the UK-based Syrian

Observatory on human rights, has reported in the last few days 26

civilian casualties from the coalition of which we are apart of

action in Syria. -- he will also know. Including seven children and

four women reported dead. As bombing moves into urban and City centres

such as Raqqa, where there has been no bombing from UK forces as yet, as

I understand it. What exactly will be the means taking forward the Nato

protocols in terms of investigating the reports of civilian casualties?

And how will that be responded to in this House and elsewhere? Mr

Speaker, I thank the right honourable gentleman particularly of

UK forces to the task. It is the first meeting in the Security

Council of finance ministers and it sends a clear signal about the

importance with which we regard the issue. There have been many measures

taken already and there are financial sanctions in place.

Financial flows working group is led by Bahrain. It has been operating

for a year now. The fact that finance ministers of the key

countries in the world are going to New York tomorrow to sit in the

forum of the Security Council to pass these measures is an important

symbol of our commitment to shutting down this channel of Daesh's

lifeblood which we regard as extremely important. We saw in

relation to sanctions on Iran that getting the financial sanctions

right is at least as important as getting the sanctions on the flow of

physical goods right. He asked me about the communication cell, and

the operation of this cell necessarily encroaches into the work

of the secret intelligence agencies, so I can't give him details of the

resources available and the number of people that are deployed but I

can tell him that it is already having visible and measurable

effects on communication channels. He asked me about coalition deaths,

debts resulting from coalition action. Any civilian death is deeply

regrettable. I was referring to deaths attributed to RAF action and

I believe while the House will be concerned about civilian deaths more

widely it will be on the question of RAF caused civilian casualties that

the house will want to focus, particularly, and I intend to ensure

that the House remains updated if the situation changes in respect of

any reports of RAF caused civilian casualties. He asked me about

protocols for investing civilian casualties reports as the campaign

moves on. Nato has well-established protocols for investigating any

incidents where civilian casualties are expected to have occurred or

imagery suggests there could have been collateral damage to civilian

buildings. Nato routinely publishes the outcome of those investigations.

John Barron. Recent discussions with Government officials on a visit to

countries in the region have confirmed key questions remain

unanswered about the strategy of combating Daesh which remains the

best funded terror group in history. On the non-military side why aren't

hard questions being asked of regional allies about funding, the

funding of donations to Daesh from within those countries? And when it

comes to the oil, why aren't we asking more of regional allies to

just not disrupt the flow of stolen oil heading north but also combating

the end customers of that oil is Chamakh because without a market

that can be no cash flow. -- of that oil, because without a market...

Daesh is receiving funding from within the region, I cannot be

certain that there is not channels of funding remaining open to them

from within the region, I'm confident none of the governments

contribute or condone any such funding. On the question of flow of

oil, as he well knows, this oil is being sold into a black market, I'm

afraid that black markets are an inevitable consequence of any kind

of embargo on the sale of goods, we are doing everything we can to

interdict and disrupt the flow of oil and indeed, to disrupt the flow

of the proceeds of the sale of that oil. But he will know that the scale

of production is small, the means of transport are crude, sometimes even

primitive, and this is quite difficult to disrupt to the extent

that we would like, arming the wellheads, so this stuff cannot be

produced in the first place, is likely to be the most efficient way

to do it. Is in the crucial difference that the RAF goes out of

its way to avoid civilian casualties while Daesh goes out of its way to

destroy and kill and maim as many Ellison civilians as it possibly

can? -- isn't the crucial difference. As well as commending --

as many innocent civilians. The how should also remember families back

home in RAF Marumatsu Rossi mouth, in Scotland, who will be without

their loved ones this Christmas. The RAF and other Nato air forces

training doctrine is all built around minimising the risk of

civilian casualties. -- RAF Marham, and RAF Lossiemouth. That is not the

case with Daesh, they do not seek to emit civilian casualties. INAUDIBLE

-- Linette. Saudi Arabian initiative against Islamic coalition, which

aims to be through the face of a very good ground force for the

future... INAUDIBLE What the Foreign Secretary not agree

with me that we have some capabilities to offer, command and

control can training -- command and control, training, perhaps they can

make a useful contribution. We have ruled out the use of UK combat

forces, in Syria. We have not ruled out the provision of UK

capabilities. All could provide very substantial reinforcement to any

troops that were deployed on the ground. Stella Creasey. Yesterday I

met with the Waltham Forest Council of mosques about Daesh, they share

the concern to tackle the threat they pose, I have questions about

the strategy. The Secretary of State said that failure was not an option,

what did he mean, how can he define failure and success in the

operations in Syria? Success is the destruction of Daesh. I do not

delude myself, I have said this many times, that destroying Daesh will

end the threat of Islamist extremism. But this particular

iteration of it, as a military force occupying territory, must be ended.

The struggle to defeat the perversion of Islam, that the Daesh

ideology represents, the extremist ideology, will take much longer, it

will be the struggle of a generation and it is a struggle that must be

led by Muslims themselves. Reclaiming their religion from the

extremists. I very much welcome the briefing and look forward to similar

such briefings in the New Year, as chairman for the all-party group for

Kurdistan, I was wondering what feedback and briefings the Foreign

Secretary has had on the effect on morale and military capability of

Kurdish Peshmerga forces following these targeted UK air strikes on

both sides of the Syrian Iraqi border? My honourable friend the

member for Bournemouth East was in Kurdistan yesterday, and he reports

that our action has boosted morale, among Kurdish forces, as you would

expect, particularly what has been happening around Sinjar province as

considerably boosted morale, and the strategic position of Kurdish forces

and they are extreme it delighted for it, no other word about it. In a

statement, the Secretary of State said that the majority of Russian

air strikes continue to target Syrian opposition forces rather than

Daesh. Russia's Broughty is to protect the regime of Bashar

al-Assad, isn't it clear, does it remain that position of the British

government that Bashar al-Assad cannot be part of any solution to

the crisis? Along since gave up using the word clear, to describe

any thing about Russian policy, it is anything but clear, it is always

paid, and the truth is, we simply do not know what the Russian strategy

is, we do not know what their objectives are, and my assessment is

that most people in the Russian system do not know, perhaps Vladimir

Putin has in his head and idea about what the endgame but what I do know,

some 75% of Russian air strikes are being conducted against people that

we believe have to be part of the solution to the Syrian problem, and

not against Daesh, we are very clear, they are the enemy. I welcome

the emphasis on a political solution and a possible ceasefire in Syria,

given the growing strength of Daesh in Libya, can you tell us how we

might get political progress and are their military consequences of that

growing concentration? As they say, I am glad that I have been asked

that question, because it so happens that there is planned for tomorrow

in Morocco a signing ceremony, it is hoped by the UN special

representative, Martin Kober, that a majority of the members of the House

of Representatives and a significant number of members of the GNC will

sign an agreement creating a government of national accord. If

that happens tomorrow, then the Western countries, the Gulf

countries, will swing behind that government of national accord, and

look to build its capability as soon and as quickly as we possibly can.

-- Martin Kobler. So that we can begin to work in Libya to contain

the threat that Daesh represents in that country. With the escalation of

the UK's role in the conflict, defence should form a central part

of planning processes to ensure the situation in the country does not

deteriorate, how will the government is sure that the coalition military

operations do not worsen conditions faced by civilians in Syria, nor

negatively affect difficult passages to create humanitarian assistance.

If it does do precisely what she has suggested, of course, the lion share

of the work is concentrated in supporting refugees who have left

the country, there are issues around getting supplies into Syria, to

support refugees, that is one of the crucial strategic areas, the

relatively small corridor along the Turkish Syria border that still

remains open, to international traffic, and securing that, making

sure it remains open, is a key objective of coalition forces for

humanitarian reasons. may I warmly applaud the new impetus

that has been given to the diplomatic approach and I'm

delighted that the United Kingdom is playing a valuable role.

In his statement, he set out the details of the strikes taking place

by the Royal air force in Iraq, he did not mention what is happening in

Syria, given that the application of brimstone was such a key difference

between us and other coalition partners, can he set out how many

strikes have taken place in Syria with dual lead brimstone. As having

my right honourable friend knows, these are operational details that I

cannot give more detail on, as I said earlier, in response to the

opposition spokesman, the UK forces are committed to the combined air

operations centre, which tasks aircraft from coalition countries to

whatever task is in hand at the moment. The analysis of strikes

carried out by the coalition is done, again, by the combined air

operations centre, and in due course, in the New Year, those

figures will be released. Does the secretary of state ever team into

air war 's website, if he does, he will see there are between 660 and

970 civilian casualties in the last 15 months of operation in Iraq and

Syria. Would he please send an official from the Foreign Office to

discuss with them the definition of a non-combatants, a civilian

casualty, and work out, so that this house may know the truth about how

many civilians are dying in Iraq and Syria as a result of our actions.

The honourable gentleman slightly caveat it is question in the last

four words, five word, " as a result of our actions", and of course he is

right, they are dying at the hands of Daesh, civilians are dying as a

result of ongoing conflict across the country, our commitment is to

ensure that civilian casualties are rising from the operations of the

royal air force, are minimised, or ideally avoided altogether. I am

sure that we are doing an excellent job. I do not know the website you

thought about, I cannot commit a Foreign Office official to going and

talking to their website... I think we have to use proper official

definitions of civilian casualties coordinated through the combined air

operations. I join my right honourable friend in welcoming the

34 nation coalition formed by Saudi Arabia to defeat terrorism, I asked

my right honourable friend, if he will urge all Middle East states

whether Shia Sunni to get behind this military Islamic Alliance to

defeat Daesh, stability in the region promotes steps towards a Shia

and Sunni reconciliation. The division in the middle East,

relatively new phenomenon, to the politics of the region, is an

helpful and destabilising. I am assured by my Sebi Arabians

counterpart that the initial 34 nations that have announced their

membership of this coalition is not an exclusive list, there is other

countries considering joining, I very much hope that further

countries will join, giving it the broadest base and the greatest

legitimacy possible. -- by my Saudi Arabian counterparts. I'm concerned

about the lack of progress on civilian protection inside Syria,

much of it perpetrated by the resume of Bashar al-Assad, ending the

indiscriminate use of barrel bombs is surely a key confidence building

measure that should be prioritised, alongside efforts towards a formal

ceasefire, should Friday not to live on a ceasefire, can I urge other

members to protect civilians, a no bombing zone for instance. Wildie

reconfirm the equivocal commitment by the government not to have any

truck with anyone working with Bashar al-Assad's forces that is a

compromise we should be willing to make, this would be morally wrong,

it would be counter-productive, given that Bashar al-Assad is the

biggest recruiting tool for Daesh. As I said in my statement, we do

aspire to drive a ceasefire as a result of Friday's meeting. Even he

recognises that that is ambitious. We are focused on confidence

building measures that do not go as far as a ceasefire but are more

likely to be readily achievable, including an end to the use of

indiscriminate weapons in civilian areas and an end to the bombing of

hospitals and medical facilities, and a guarantee of humanitarian

access to besieged areas on both sides of the conflict. She asks me

if we will consider alternative methods of protecting the civilian

population, she mentioned specifically nobleman zones. I am

afraid that we have looked extensively and a lot of military

effort has gone into analysing what is possible and what is not. The

analysis is that this is not something that will be practical to

deliver in the absence of forces on the ground and, as she knows, we

have no intention of committing forces on the ground. I do want to

pick up the points you made about Assad, the reason we say Assad can

play your part in the future is because they want to end the killing

and, whatever has happened in the past, if I thought this is bring the

killing to an end more quickly, I was looking to, it will not. It will

not bring us a ceasefire or an end to the Civil War and you will not

get all of the guns in Syria turned on Daesh. Will marry honourable

friend agree that when you side with Vladimir Putin, you need to use a

very long spoon. In this battle, it is somehow helpful and we should

reconsider sanctions. My honourable friend confirmed that that is not

the view of the Government. The Government speaks clear that anyone

who genuinely want to take part in the fight against Daesh is welcome

to join the coalition and to do so. What the Russians have done so far

is, at best, ambiguous. Yes, they have bombed Daesh editions. Since

the loss of the Russian aircraft, to almost certainly a Daesh inspired

attack with bombs. The percentage of Russian air strikes on Daesh has

increased. It is still only around 25% of the total of the L strikes.

The remainder are targeted against other opposition. -- air strikes.

You mentioned in your statement there referring to a coalition of

70,000. The coalition are very diverse and have very different

goals and ambitions. Cute you update this house on how this argument is

coming together? Attack could you? As I think we covered quite

extensively in the debate to weeks ago, there isn't -- this isn't a

certain army, of course it isn't. This is many diverse groups fighting

one opposition. We can confirm there are approximately 70,000 fighters in

the campaign. This means that they have objectives that they can

broadly associate with and people we can broadly be prepared to work

with. As I set out in my speech coding that debate two weeks ago,

the way we envisage this working is an end to the Civil War, thus

creating a legitimate governments in Syria which the community can

support, training, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance,

weapons, ammunition, commander support anti-Syrian army lost

Digital lives working alongside -- is thus the working alongside them.

Daesh are on the back foot in Iraq. Sinjar has been liberated, remedy,

as the Street, is being overrated. There has been some very good and

positive outcomes to. There has been great challenges and there is a real

need for a strong political portion for coordination, post-conflict

coordination, in that country. There is a strong ambassador letters

respected on all sides. We have been doing just that. As my honourable

friend says, we have considerable influence in both Baghdad and the

bill. Some of the steps that need to be taking to create an environment

in which the Sunni population in Iraq feels comfortable and feel like

fully fledged citizens of the country are locked in the Iraqi

parliament and they are being blocked for a variety of reasons.

Some of them to do with the basis of politics rather than the issues high

principle. Does the secretary agree with me that Vladimir Putin must

choose whether he wants his country to remain a respected member of the

UN Security Council or continue down the road towards international

pariah and being a rogue state. If he chooses the latter path, is there

a lease deal to make sure that it does not profit in any way from what

it has been doing? I want to answer this question properly. I have said

before in this house that, while I deplore many things that the

Russians do, I do not believe that Russia and President Putin

recognised a threat from Daesh to Russia, which is at least as great

as the threat from Russia to the west. Russia has 13 million Sunni

Muslims living inside the borders of the Russian Federation. What we

disagree about his methodology. President Putin would say, if you

are here, to answer the question, that he is going out defeating Daesh

in the way that he believes will be most effective. We fundamentally

disagree with him for the reason that I explain to the honourable

lady a view minutes ago. Unless Assad is gone, we will not get free

conciliation any Syrian war and we will not get all Syrian forces

turning the guns on Daesh. Democratically recognisable methods

that we favour. But I know what he was saying. My honourable friend has

inferred... My right honourable friend has referred to the

challenges from Russia. Does he not always agree that they are

presenting huge opportunities and a very good example of the cooperation

we saw yesterday with Benteke going into space? -- Kim Peek going into

space. They went up into space and my honourable friend was that as

yet. Will he not agree that overall, it is now in the British national

interest to have better relations with Russia and if he wants more

cooperation in the UN, it would be a good idea to look at Ukrainian

situation? Yes, clearly these are two separate situations and we are

not trading them. Russia has to comply with its international

obligations in relation to Ukraine, remove its troops from Ukraine under

the Minsk agreement. It also has to decide if it wants to be part of the

fight against Daesh of person you are other methods. Thank you. It is

right that the Foreign Secretary has come to this house to make a

statement today. It is right that people across the house a tribute to

the inspiring commitment of our Armed Forces and their families. On

the subject of commitment, but the Foreign Secretary think it is a

little strange that we keep hearing the Government berate other

countries for their lack of commitment on aid for Syria, when

our commitment to refugees has been so very poor and does he feel that

it should be improving, diplomatic commitment if we gave a little bit

more sanctuary to just take you more. No. As I have said before, we

are very clear that the best way to support most refugees is by

providing the aid they need for the food programmes, health care,

shelter, education for their children to enable them to remain in

the region until this conflict is over and then return to their homes

to rebuild the country and be part of Syria's future. What we have said

is that for those who are especially vulnerable as defined by the UN, we

will accept and therefore resettlement. These are the most

vulnerable refugees requiring extensive support once they arrive

here and we are very proud to resettle 1000 of them by Christmas.

My honourable friend has reassured us that Assad and not be part of the

long-term solution. -- can not. Does he believe that all forces against

the Assad regime are cooperating with the military process? The Assad

regime has said that it has selected its negotiating team and it is ready

to meet with the Syrian opposition on a no preconditions basis. Of

course, that assertion remains to be tested. They regime remains to be

seen. The talks in Syria will depend on a crucial phone call from Moscow.

I was going to call the honourable gentleman, but I want to be assured

that he did not leave the chamber at any time. I just nipped to the

gents. Very well. It is talked about that Afghanistan recruit in 29 of

the 34 states, transfer money from the outfield of Syria to fund the

campaign. The foreign fighters now have trained divisions in

Afghanistan and have declared war on the Caliban, what is the

Government's assessment of the situation in Afghanistan and what

does it think is best going forward to defeat Daesh? -- Caliban. At the

11th hour Syrian debate, it is not many of the things you have shared

with those in great difficulty. I thank him for his question. There is

evidence of penetration in Daesh from many countries, including

Afghanistan. What we have to do is continue to support, as we have

done, any international causation has done, and the Government have to

continue to find in the Afghanistan police and National Army in this

attempt to create a new equilibrium and we will find this happening

elsewhere. We need to be clear about this and it will pop up in other

countries as well, and we need to be ready to respond to it where ever it

arises. I welcomed the statement and remarks about humanitarian support

and humanitarian corridors, is there any more he can tell the house about

the ongoing discussions about securing access across Syria for

humanitarian support and whether or not there is any progress in meeting

a resolution? That'll be one of the issues on the table on Friday. We

believe, I mentioned earlier on, and end to indiscriminate use of weapons

in civilian areas, and end to the bombing of medicals facilities and

humanitarian access to besieged areas. These are the confidence

building measures that we believe the UK is promoting and to be

providing any conference on Friday. He has been very clear in telling us

they have been no civilian casualties and the Foreign Secretary

has clarified today there have been no reports of civilian casualties. I

was surprised to read yesterday that the Ministry of Defence responded,

what you mean by people. What does the Ministry of Defence mean by

people? That is the big question for the Ministry of Defence. Clearly

people will have been killed. As a result of air strikes. We have no

reports of civilian casualties are rising. I cannot afraid tell the

honourable lady anything more than that. I very much commend the

updates and briefing that my right honourable friend has given us. I

was very privileged last month to be in the region meeting with the

post-merger mac who were very grateful for our support. Can I have

assurances that they will continue to work directly with Kurds in the

region to press the site further against ISO. I think he is well

aware from his visit we are giving support to Kurdish forces in Iraq.

In the present time we do not carry out those activities with Kurdish

forces in Syria. They have shown their fighting abilities. Is it not

a concern that the further involvement of tribal groups and

grips like the Muslim brotherhood will lead to further into conflict,

as we have seen in Syria. Is it not better to engage with the grips with

our coalition to deal with this problem properly and realistically.

It is better than having wishful thinking about this issue. I do not

think the two are mutually exclusive. I think it may be

possible in the future, once we have established a transitional

government in Syria. To rally a diverse opposition forces against

ISO alongside what is left of the Syrian army. -- Isil. The special

forces, logistics and target servers and military intelligence analysis

and so forth. That is the most effective model we will be able to

put together. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I welcome his statement today to the

House and his ongoing commitment to bring statements back to us. The

crisis in Syria has become a regional conflict, not just because

of the impact of the so-called Islamic state but because of the

refugee crisis as well. Does he agree we must continue to support

the authorities in Jordan and Lebanon who have been so affected by

the impact of refugees? And Turkey. We are working with all three

countries and in particular with Jordan to try and bring forward a

scheme that will allow refugees in Jordan to be able to access the

labour market and to support the Jordanian economy in a way that

allows them to engage with that foreground. In parallel with

military action with 2-mac against IIS, we must work harder to support

Syrian refugees. This is supported by a range of organisations. It

would allow more vulnerable refugees, beyond the 20,000 agreed

by the government. This is something the UK Government will support? I

think he has asked this question to the Prime Minister and the pie

minister has been clear we think we have got our position like rights to

Michael Wright. -- the Prime Minister. He will look at the

question of orphaned children and I will remind him of that commitment.

I to join with other members welcoming the statement. I welcome

the news that Ministers have been urging the UN envoy to help women's

grips. Can he update the House on the response to these

representations. Not great news to report on that front. The gender

balance in the meeting was disappointing. Given that it was

happening around about the time that Saudi Arabia itself was making a

historic step forward in women's participation in its particle

system, it is disappointing. We have given feedback on that and we are

focused on this issue. Should we ponder with some scepticism the

apparently evermore pivotal role that is given to Saudi Arabia in

this current situation. Not just because of the issues being faced in

this conflict but also because of the principles that the Foreign

Secretary noted a broken every day for Saudi Arabian citizens and for

themselves. Will the UK Government and others be trying to shepherd the

opposition will be leaving that role to Saudi Arabia? We have provided

support to the opposition in logistical terms, in trying to

prepare its role as a negotiating convention. We will continue to do

so. Nobody should underestimate the power that Saudi Arabia has because

of the position of the King of Saudi Arabia as the custodian of the two

holy mosques. That is the unique power to bring together people who

do not particularly want to sit in a room together and force them to

engage with each other. In a storm we need to work with partners who

have the capabilities that we need. Saudi Arabia has those capabilities.

Syria needs political stability. We may have to deal with the Assad

regime in the short term. Will he agree that the regime cannot be part

of the long-term solution, even if other regional partners support his

dictatorship. Our clear position is for moral and practical purposes. We

will not get a solution here that involves a sad being a long-term

part of the political structure in Syria. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can I

welcome the early reporting of this very important subject to many in

the House. Can I welcome the political and diplomatic efforts

that have clearly been undertaken. Those diplomatic efforts involving

Saudi Arabia and the Muslim world at the show. There are two points that

we have to acknowledge, many of those Muslim countries are under

attack from Diane Shan other terrorists. -- dimensional. We have

to use that very carefully. I would urge the government to continue

those conversations. If they are to be defeated properly, it is not just

the body, it is the evil ideology. On the issue of civilian deaths, the

reality is tens of thousands of civilians did lose their lives in

Iraq. Tens of thousands did lose their lives in Afghanistan. What

assurances can he give me? Hundreds of thousands have lost their lives

in Syria and people are continuing to lose their lives in Syria, at the

hands of their systematic murder and a sound's the bombing. I can give

him no assurance that we will not seek similar levels of casualties in

Syria. The only way we can seek to prevent them is to bring the Civil

War to an end and bring the rule of Daesh two an end. We are committed

to defeating Daesh in Syria. Anyone of them can be attacked by Daesh

order affiliated groups. We have two not only destroyed the

manifestations of this organisation, we have two destroy the underpinning

ideology. That would be a longer task and it will not be completed in

my lifetime. I am pleased we are targeting the oil fields. Can you

tell the House why it is only now we have joined the coalition that we

are hitting these oil fields. Either other places we should be hitting? I

may have missed something in his question. The simple answer is

because they are in Syria. Before the few days ago we were not allowed

to target in Syria. We needed to take the fight to Daesh an Syria.

Ticket to its economic support -- take it to. In the debate just two

weeks ago we were told that Daesh represented the head of a snake and

they posed a threat to the security of the United Kingdom. What action

has been taken by the RAF to stop Daesh and if no action has been

taken, why not? I cannot talk about individual targets and attacks. He

is right. The focus was in the debate about the command and control

headquarters. That has to be the target if we are to destroy them. We

have to go about this deliberately and I think rushing to strike them

in its headquarters is not necessarily the best way to go about

the task. I am not a military strategist and I do not think it

would be sensible for politicians to try and set the military plan. What

I do know is targeting the leadership Daesh of in such a busy

city will require planning and a great deal of intelligence and

surveillance data and the proper analysis of that data. I welcome his

commitment to a political solution and peace talks. We need to include

you wide range of countries in order to ensure all parties get around the

table in Syria. One of the great achievements of the Vienna process

is that Iran as well as Saudi Arabia is engaged. Two countries who do not

normally talk to each other are talking to each other in Vienna, or

this week in New York. Hearing what you said about civilian casualties,

the effect of any warming is too minty in the flow of refugees

interview Rip. What is the Government doing about refugee

status for refugees in camps whose primary family is in Britain? Key as

acid is specific and detailed question. I would be cancelling my

arm if I were to answer. I will write to him and place a copy of my

letter in the library. I will need to speak to the development

secretary before answering. The Financial Times reported that

Daesh supported Syria and Iraq into key factors, death and taxes. The

sale of oil revenue. What can the Secretary of State tell us about the

affect our hero strikes are having about economic growth in the rural

area of Syria. Close to inevitability death and tax, are

immediately unavoidable as they are in Daesh territories, as they are in

many other places worldwide. There are some reports that Daesh are

facing financial stress. Funding has been cut and payment to fighters

have been cut or delayed. This is still a very well funded

organisation but the huge one-off bonanza that they acquired in the

early days of the surge into Iraq where they were capturing hundreds

of thousands of dollars in cash and bank and simply taking away as

ended. I think they are facing a little more pressure financially

than they were back then. We intend to keep tightening the screws.

Canley Secretary of State say more about what has been done regarding

the Iraqi Government and SUNY? They are the mainstay in that area. --

SUNY. The expertise of many people love gone from Iraq into that area.

Can you say more about what pressures can be brought up on Daesh

to deal with them in the long run? We are working very closely with the

Iraqi Government and supporting the Prime Minister, remains committed to

the programme of outreach to the SUNY committee in Iraq. He faces

challenges delivering that programme. His immediate predecessor

as opposed and there is a significant bloc in parliament that

is making it impossible to progress with two key pieces of legislation.

The creation of a National Guard that with the regional -based forces

composed of groups that reflected the liturgy and confessional

allegiance of the regions -- the ethnicity. And beady participation

rare about the collapse of the Assad regime -- the bass regime, with so

many people into eyesore. The brains were former Baptist military from

the Iraqi regime. I was such a key part of the argument for bombing

debate. My honourable friend, the Minister

for the Armed Forces, tells me that there is a certain amount of

operational information available in the golf .uk website on a daily

basis. -- gov.uk the website. The secretary set out the complexities

of establishing a civilian safe haven on the ground in Syria,

notwithstanding that, given the intensification of both the Civil

War and our own battles against Daesh, with the Foreign Secretary

perhaps enter into dialogue with the neighbours of Syria to see whether

they or the Islamic military coalition that he set out in his

statement would be willing to provide those grounds of ports that

are needed to provide a safe haven for civilians? I do regularly talk

to my Turkish colleagues and they have, as you know, been a promoter

of the idea of creating safe havens in the north, along the border, with

Turkey. All proposals have been founded on the question of, who will

provide the defensive air cover to those people? Given that there is a

very sophisticated Syrian defence system. Now, in the presence of

Russian air to air defence capability in the area. Regarding

the RAF tycoons in the year in Syria, they have not only been

targeting targets on the ground, they have been using your missiles

to shoot in the air. The only enemy we have in Syria is Daesh, there is