12/01/2017 House of Commons

support for disabled people who are in work. Points of order will come

later. We now come to the select committee statement. The chair of

the women inequalities select committee, the right honourable

member for Basingstoke, will speak for up to ten minutes, during which

no interventions may be taken. At the conclusion of her statement I

will call members to put questions on the subject of the statement and

call Mrs Maria Miller to respond to these in turn. Members can expect to

be called only once. Interventions should be questions and should be

brief. The French bent -- front bench may take part in questioning.

I remind the house that ordinarily such a statement and questioning on

it can be a spectator to take in total approximately 20 minutes. I

called the chair of the women and equality select committee Mrs Maria

Miller. I would like to thank the backbench business committee for

this opportunity to make a statement to the house on the fifth report of

the women inequalities committee on women in the House of Commons after

the next general election in 2020. The successful preparation of all

our reports depends on the hard work of the committee's clerks and staff,

the diligence of honourable members who make up our committee and I'm

glad to see my honourable friend the member for Portsmouth South and the

member for Bath here today. Also the generosity of our witnesses, who

give up their time to prepare and take part in our sessions and I

particularly like to thank my right honourable friend the member for

Derbyshire Dales, Islington North, Moray and the honourable member from

Westmorland and Lonsdale, all of whom enthusiastically shared their

views and the work of their respective parties with the

committee. If 100 years ago, Mr Speaker, the suffragettes who fought

for women's rights fought for our right to be elected to sit in this

place were told that just 455 women would be elected to this place over

the next ten decades, I'm not sure whether they would have laughed or

cried. I think they would be proud the United Kingdom had seen two

female prime ministers but the facts are that there are as many men

sitting in this place today as there are women ever elected to be members

of Parliament. At the moment we have 195 women MPs, and 455 men. And I

have yet to see any evidence to suggest that women are less

qualified than men to represent their communities or that women

don't want to have the opportunity to be a member of Parliament to

improve the lives of those who live in their community. Therefore this

startling imbalance should cause all of us a great deal of concern,

because at best we are failing to reach out, and at worst the parties

who are in the most part responsible for selecting candidates are failing

in their due to. The select committee's report provides an

evidence -based set of recommendations to change that, to

help ensure Britain does not slip further down the global rankings for

the rubber dissipation in parliament and to promote a more representative

parliament, and to make this place a stronger place. Our report has

consciously focus on female representation but our

recommendations showed, we feel, open up discussions on how to secure

improved diversity in other areas too. A parliament with more black

and ethnic minority representation, more disabled members, ensure that

the debates we have, the laws we have are going to be better. Of

course the report builds on significant work that has already

been done relating to representation and Parliament such as the report of

the Speaker's Parliament convened by yourself. Also the cop brands of

work done by Professor Sarah Childs, who produced a good Parliament

guide. The trigger for this new report was the boundary commissions

initial proposals for reducing the size of Parliament to 600

constituencies. There is no reason why this should inversely impact

women or any other group, but these proposals would mean that more than

20 women MPs would see their seats to all intents and purposes

disappear, and if political parties don't take action, this will mean a

lower proportion of women MPs in the next general election. As of the

committeerecommendations are for government political parties and

Parliament itself, because we all have to take responsibility. Our

Kieran accommodations for more transparency from parties on the

work they are doing to improve candidate selection, and we feel

that the government should majorly bring into force the statutory

requirement for political parties to publish their Parliamentary

perversity data fit general elections as set out in section 106

of the equality act so that we can properly scrutinise the record of

parties in selecting a diverse slate of Parliamentary candidates.

Secondly that the government should seek to introduce in legislation in

this Parliament is statutory minimum proportion of female candidates in

general elections for each political party, and we have proposed a

minimum 45% of women. This measure would only be brought into force if

the number of proportion of women MPs fails to increase significantly

after the next general election. Thirdly as part of our

recommendations we have also set out a domestic target of 45% for the

representation of women in parliament and local government by

2030. This really is to inform the work being done by ONS to

established domestic indicators for the UN sustainable develop and goals

and a particular goal five, an indicator that my right honourable

friend the member for Putney and also David Cameron fought hard for

when these goals were established, goals that apply to the UK as well

as other members of the UN. To make progress these measures need to have

real teeth, which is by the committee has also recommended that

the remit of the electoral commission be extended to introduce

fines for noncompliance. In our evidence, sessions of the German and

leaders of the political parties it was evident there is enormous

support for more representative parliament, and indeed each one

agreed that Parliament would be a better place if 50% of MPs were

women. But we need to turn those warm sentiment in the bums on seats,

and I hope that is not unparliamentary language, Mr

Speaker, but what the parties lack in clear and, hence if the turn this

into play action. This Parliament is the mother of all parliaments but at

the moment and our watch, we are letting ourselves down on a global

stage. Since 1999, Britain has fallen from 25th in the world the

48th in the world, in terms of female rippers in tension. This

Parliament should have a clear aspiration to be the global leader

for female representation and diversity more generally and the

recommendations in the report can help us achieve that. The Labour

Party is committed to increasing the representation of women in

parliament and at every level in politics and there is a report that

recognises more than half of the women on these Labour benches, 43.7%

of the Parliamentary Labour Party is made up of women, and much of this

is to do with Labour's commitment to short lists. Does the one lady think

other parties should look to introduce short lists of their

Parliamentary selections, and does she agree that parties not already

taking direct positive action should do so as a matter of urgency?

is a body of evidence that parties can look at. I don't think it is for

a select lack -- FOI select committee to debate as to how they

run their own selection procedures. That is for them but they should

also be looking at the evidence. Mr Speaker, in recalling that Labour

lost one of their safest seats in 2005 over the imposition of a women

only short list, what role does my right honourable friend see in local

associations being able to choose the candidate they think is best for

that area irrespective of gender or for the voters to siding to vote for

the person they think is best to represent that area irrespective of

their gender? I thank my honourable friend for that question. He is

absolutely right. Associations and local parties have a huge role to

play in making sure they get the right person for the job in that

area. But it is very surprising to see that just one in four candidates

at the last general election was female. I think perhaps we need to

ensure that the right training is in place, the right support in place

that we have a diverse city of candidates for those associations

and parties to choose from. The SNP welcomes the publication of this

report. We firmly believe that all political parties should be held to

account for the action they are taking to improve this democratic

but is it because it is simply not acceptable in 2017 for women to be

discriminated against or underrepresented whether in the

boardroom, politics or anywhere else. The SNP is committed to the

increased numbers of MPs and MSP selected the UK and Scottish

parliaments and our gender balanced cabinet being one of the few in the

world to do so. The SM people smack Scottish Government is also tasting

decisive action to make sure women are represented in senior and

decision-making roles including in the boardroom and our programme for

government contains many ambitious commitments in support of women's

equality. Can I ask if the UK Government is considering similar

measures and when they will bring these into fruition? We think it is

important that after the next general election if there is some

progress made, -- if there is not significant progress made that 45%

of candidates should be female. She mentioned equal representation in

patent -- cabinets and I was heartened to see Justin Trudeau when

he became president in Canada saying what the jerks pectin 2016, I think

which say what should we expect in 2017? My right honourable friend

mentioned the excellent report by Professor Sarah Childs. Would you

agree some of those recommendations would also help to pre-empt more

women into Parliament? My honourable friend from Portsmouth South is

right. We are building on firm foundations here. I think that

Parliament itself has to look very carefully at its operation to ensure

that it is doing everything it can to encourage all women to come

forward. Historically we have looked very closely at things like child

care, family friendly working. I think also we should be looking very

carefully at some of the dissuading effects that the violence, online

abuse that female members experience, how that can actually

put people off as well. That is just as important, and something the

house needs to take very seriously. When John Bright first coined the

term other Parliament, he was saying that even England, which was the

mother of Parliaments, had still not brought for -- Paul Dummett proceed

to the country because the vast majority were not able to vote, so

now we are coming up to the hundredth anniversary of some women

in 1918 being allowed to vote, isn't one of the biggest problems finance?

Because many women are paid less still than men, and working class

candidates still find it very difficult to get selected because it

is a very expensive business? This is something which came out in

the report that the cost of becoming a Member of Parliament can be very

steep indeed and is therefore sometimes outside of if reach of

some people, whether they are male or female. The parties need to ask

themselves very carefully the onty obstacles they put in the way of

candidates and whether they can lessen them either through financial

support or not. My own party, the Conservative Party have looked at

them very carefully and given practical help in the past.

Can I say to my honourable honourable friend that I basically

backed what she's aiming for, but put a caution on one or two issues.

The number of women MPs what had to match the number. When my wife was

first in Parliament it was 5%. Now it is 30%. It is important not to

think that Governments should require Parliament and parties to do

things. But one of them is not putting people into Parliament. It

should be giving people the opportunities and experience,

whether they can be chosen on merit with necessary luck. My honourable

friend makes some interesting points. Of course his wife was I

think probably one of my role models when I looked at Parliament and saw

the effective nature of women and the work they did here. But I only

have to look at some other institutions like the University of

London, who only started to admit women in 1878 but has more than 50%

of its students who are female. There are other institutions who

have made a journey more successfully than we have. We ask

questions why progress hasn't been made more quickly. As national

secretary of the SND until the end of last year I saw some successes

but also some of the struggles that come with implementing all-women

short list, where some cases despite having the requirement we struggled

to find women candidates. What does she think can be done at the for

mayive point of where people might become candidates in terms of work

experience with local politicians standing for a local council or at a

local party basis? The honourable gentleman is right. The work needs

to go in early. I would like to applaud the work of 50/50 Parliament

in the campaign they are currently running, which is Ask Her To Stand.

Many honourable ladies here today will know it has been the case it

has taken somebody asking women to stand for Parliament before they've

done that and that early work, particularly standing for local

Government can be a way of effectively building people's

confidence into taking this on as a career choice.

Mr David Nuttall. A man from a working class

background could be discriminated against if all the proposals and

recommendations in her report were accepted? My honourable friend is

right and speaking as somebody who went to a council house and went to

a comprehensive, I too don't want to see this place populated by an

unrepresented group of people. But it is unrepresentative at the

moment. So we have to, I think take some tough decisions here and rather

than fail to take action because of the threat of some groups feeling

discriminated against, actually put right what is a real injustice at

the moment in terms of fee male representation. My Right Honourable

friend for her statement and the hard work in leading our committee.

The UK signed up to the universal sustainability goals where no-one

was vouched to be left behind. It is embarrassing we only have 30% here

in the UK. Will my Right Honourable friend join me on calling to focus

on parliamentary reputation as they implement the plan? I thank my

committee friend for that comment. He will know we heard yesterday in

the conversation on the goals that the credibility of our country is in

jeopardy if we don't donor to implement the sustainable goals,

particularly goal five, which was so hard fought for by the member for

Putney and David Cameron at the time. Part of that is to make sure

we have significant improvements in parliamentary reputation.

THE SPEAKER: Point of order. I have heard you on occasions, Sir,

advising ministers from the dispatch box. I wonder if you notice the

Leader of the House has a habit of either staring at the honourable

member for Wellingborough or vacantly into space when answering

questions from this quarter of the House? There is the question of

audibility, Sir. But there is also the issue of nonverbal

communication. For example, when the leader of the House was unable to

dif fren cat between a 94% in Scotland compared to 88% in England,

we would have seen us shaking our heads. When he made an unfonded

comment of the Scottish referendum campaign he would have seen us

laughing at time. So I don't want to pick out the leader of the House, in

particular, but perhaps you can give kour -- encourage all members in

responding to them when being asked questions in debates and statements.

THE SPEAKER: Statements made in this chamber should always be

communicated through a chair. The second point is that of course

people speak from the dispatch box should address, and in so doing,

look at the House, rather than behind them at the member to whom

they might perhaps be responding. Beyond that I think I will not

venure. If I were uncharitable, I would imagine that The Right

Honourable gentleman was seeking against all precedent and

expectation of him to propaganda. But because I am not uncharitable, I

can not imagine that he was seeking to do anything of the kind.

Point of order, Mr Derek Twigg. Maybe I can ask your advice, there

is a proposal to site a hospital in my constituent by the Government. It

has caused angst and concern. It is I have been pursuing questions for

The Right Honourable member for Scarborough and Whitby. The

Government seem to take a decision to put these hostels in Labour

areas, mostly Labour areas. I have been trying to ascertain which

parliamentary constituents that the hostels are in. The minister replied

on a number of occasions. The last said that he couldn't tell me

because of the safety of the asylum seekers who were there. He couldn't

give me the individual locations. This is odd because on Monday night,

the council will be considering a planning application for this asylum

hostel, which has gone through full public consultation. I can not see

how the minister can give an answer like that. If, and I put down the

question, if still refuses to answer, given the information I have

put forward today, what advice will he give me?

THE SPEAKER: Off the top of my head, my advice is as follows, first and

this would be my principal suggestion, I think that the

honourable gentleman should go to the table office and seek its advice

as to the nature and terms of the questions to be tableded. He

muttered, I think, that he's already done that. If that has not availed

him, I am disappointed to hear it. I have again, purely without prior

notification of this matter, and therefore off the top of my head,

two further thoughts. One is that the honourable gentleman can,

without delay, seek an adjournment debate on the matter, with the

relevant minister, in which he will have a face-to-face opportunity over

a decent period to probe the minister with the relentlessness and

tenacity for which the honourable gentleman is renowned in all parts

of the House. Secondly, he can of course use Freedom of Information

opportunities to try to ascertain the facts that he wants to

ascertain. If neither of those approaches helps, I've got a hunch

that the honourable gentleman will be raising his concern with me on

the floor again. Point of order. Momentarily I felt

moved to be charitable. I always thought that when I addressed you,

Sir, in the chair, I was addressing the House. And if I may say so, my

pleasure in so doing is magnified when I address the chair when you

are occupying it. THE SPEAKER: Well! My cup runneth

over, to be complimented by a parliamentarian of the repute of The

Right Honourable gentleman really does cause me, for the rest of the

day, to go about my business with an additional glint in my eye and

spring in my step and possibly two inches taller. I'm a happy man

indeed. I've always liked The Right Honourable gentleman in the 20 years

I have known him. And I like him even more now. If there are no

further points of order, we now come, I think he better watch

himself a little bit with the Deputy Speakers in the coming days! We come

to the backbench motion on Yemen to move the motion I call the chair of

the International Development Select Committee of the House. Mr Twigg.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can I first of all thank the Backbench Business

Committee for granting this very important and timely debate? It is

good to see members from all parties in the House attending this debate.

Can I pay tribute to those who have worked on this issue of Yemen for a

much longer period of than I have. My interest in this has really

arisen over the last year or so because of my role as chair of the

International Development Select Committee. I am going to focus in my

speech on the humanitarian crisis in Yemen and then on the specific issue

raised in the motion around alleged violations by all sides of

international humanitarian law. I will not be addressing the specific

matter of arm sales to Saudi Arabia, as I know my friend and co-sponsor

for the motion, the honourable gentleman, the member for Warwick

and Leamington, who chairs the committees on arms export controls

will be addressing this important issue if he catches your eye. The

Yemen conflict began in early 2015. Less than two years ago. But it has

its roots in the Arab Spring of 201 1. When the President was succeeded

the movement took advantage of the new President's weakness, took

control of parts of northern Yemen and later took the capital. From

there, the conflict intensified with the intervention in 2015 of the

Saudi Arabian-led coalition, backed by US, UK and French intelligence

and on the other side the huty rebels, backed by Iraq. Yemen has

been called "the forgotten crisis." For example, by Amnesty

International. It is a crisis which surely we cannot ignore.

The President of the International Committee of the Red Cross has said

that the intensity and severity of the fighting in Yemen has left the

country looking like Syria did after five years of conflict. Since the

conflict began, nearly 10,000 people are estimated to have been killed,

with roughly 4,000 civilians losing their lives and 37,000 injured.

That is an average each day during this conflict of 75 deaths or

injuries. Surely, madam, Deputy Speaker, we cannot allow this to

continue. I pay tribute to my honourable friend and the committee

for the work they have done on committee and the member for Warwick

and Leamington. The issue here is not just the scorecard of shame that

he has told the House about, it is the access for those amazing aid

organisations. And that is why a ceasefire is so important. Does he

agree with me that the most important aspect of what we are

saying today is to get that ceasefire, so the aid can get

through? I'm grateful to my friend and in

particular pay tribute to his long-standing work on this issue and

the work of the all-party parliamentary group on Yemen. He is

absolutely right to say that a ceasefire is crucial and I'm going

to come on to the issue that he raised for access for humanitarian

organisations. So at the end of 2015, the International Development

Select Committee decided to conduct an inquiry into the crisis in Yemen

and during the course of last year, we published two reports on Yemen.

The first on our own relating specifically to the humanitarian

crisis, and the second in conjunction with the business

committee, through the work of the committees on arms export controls.

One of the recommendations in our first report was the UK Government

should put pressure on all parties to the conflict to comply with their

obligations under international humanitarian law that includes very

importantly measures to protect civilians and as my right honourable

friend reminded the House just now to allow humanitarian agencies a

safe space to operate. The humanitarian situation is grave, our

own government has described Yemen is one of the most serious

humanitarian crisis in the world. The United Nations estimates that

more than 80% of the population of Yemen, more than 20 million people

are in immediate need of humanitarian assistance. 40 million

people face food shortages, 19 million don't have access to safe

drinking water, more than 3 million have had to flee their homes because

of the conflict. The situation is particularly dire or children. The

United Nations has estimated that eight children are either killed or

maimed every day in Yemen and almost half of school age children are not

in school. Exacerbating this we have the difficulty of access for import

of essential supplies such as energy, food and medicine, this

feels the humanitarian crisis. Supplies are flowing through to the

country more quickly compare to six months ago and clearly that progress

is welcome but levels remain significantly below the position in

March 20 15. This is not only damaging the economy of the country

but any further changes in their villa availability of food risk

famine. The minister is on the front bench and putting over ?100 million

into Yemen to help relieve some of the most pressing humanitarian

challenges. The UK is the fourth largest donor to Yemen and leading

the way in these humanitarian crises but we need to do more to press

other countries to fund the relief of this crisis.

If it's giving ?100 million to Yemen, which I support, what's

happening to it because presumably it's blocked because you can get

through to the people that really needed so I suppose it's in some

bank or food store somewhere. The situation varies between different

parts of the country but I remember seeing the right honourable

gentleman sitting next to him in his previous role as the Minister, we

discussed this when he came to give evidence and one of the challenges

is one that the honourable gentleman has reminded us of, getting the

access within the country saw the aid can get through, not necessarily

requiring the UK to spend more money but to make sure we do our utmost to

get the aid through and that really brings us on to the challenges of

achieving a ceasefire but also political progress in Yemen as well.

Even in these challenging circumstances it's working to

improve food and water security and provide emergency resilience to

those most at risk. Unfortunately those organisations that have been

or still are in some cases on the ground helping to alleviate the

humanitarian situation have told the select committee that their work has

been threatened by the conflict. We know that since March 20 1513 health

workers have died, 31 have been injured, the world health

organisation tells us that more than 70 health centres have been damaged

or destroyed completely, more than 600 have closed due to damage or

shortage of supplies or staff. Last year NGO doctors of the world

withdrew from Yemen because they couldn't guarantee the safety of

their volunteers on the ground. The number of non-governmental

organisations have told us that there is a shrinking humanitarian

space in Yemen making it even more difficult for them to carry out

their work. All sides of the conflict need to comply with

international humanitarian law and one of the ways they should do so is

to ensure that humanitarian organisations work unimpeded in

Yemen. Does my honourable friend share my concern that attacks have

occurred from both sides and from the Saudi led coalition even one

chord notes have been provided. The attack on the hospital even though

the cord were provided two weeks before. I thank my honourable friend

and pay tribute to the work he's done on this issue and I agree

entirely with what he says and it brings me on to the second part of

my speech to the House this afternoon. The second major

recommendation that came out of both reports and recommended by the

Foreign Affairs Committee which disagreed with us on the question of

arms sales but agreed on this issue is that there has to be an

independent United Nations led investigation of alleged violations

of international humanitarian law by both sides in this conflict. There

have been so many allegations... I wanted to make the point in my

honourable friend that all in the Foreign Affairs Committee disagreed

with the report, it was a minority. If I might pay tribute to my

honourable friend for her long-standing interest and activity

on these issues, not least for active participation in the

committees on arm export controls which perform a vital function and

should continue. When I given the Foreign Affairs Committee report has

been mentioned, I've intended to come in at this point, I want to

point out that isn't it a fact that all three reports of the business

committee, the International development committee and the

Foreign Affairs Committee agreed by majority votes. I believe that is

the case, certainly as was by a majority vote. All three reports are

in support of this motion and therefore I'm not aware of any of

those voting in the minorities in any of the was the committees doing

so because they disagreed with this recommendation and I hope the

honourable gentleman and I have framed the motion that can enjoy

support across the House because it does. Focus on this issue of it

independent investigation. The chairman of the select committee

will say it was my particular concern when we took that vote and

my decision is on record that this independent investigation take place

and that is something which I feel very strongly about to put on record

today. I thank the honourable lady who is a great member of the

International development committee and I recall her focus was very much

we needed to see this independent investigation first and that's why

she voted in the way that she did but we were all agreed across the

committee that there should be an independent international

investigation and that featured in our first report as well as in the

second. In May 2015, the beginning of the

conflict, human rights watch accused the rebels of violations of

international law in the southern Sea port city. The crimes that were

highlighted including the killing of civilians and the arrest of aid

workers at gunpoint. Since then they had been accused of a range of other

serious alleged violations of international humanitarian law, for

example the situation in the besieged city, the prevention of the

import of basic commodities, medicine, propane and oxygen

cylinders to that city. The United Nations expert panel has documented

185 alleged abuses. As my honourable friend reminded us, medicine and

some Frontier who work often in these difficult and challenging

situations suffered the attacks on different hospitals in a three-month

period. Last September the Yemen data Project said a third of all the

Saudi led raids in Yemen have hit civilian sites on the UN High

Commissioner for human rights has estimated that 66% of the civilian

deaths in Yemen have been caused by Saudi led air strikes. The United

Nations human rights Council... Angry with him and concur with his

point but the UN panel also describe the problem facing the Saudi

coalition, the GCC countries, the Houthi rebels are operating in urban

areas and against international law, there are effectively using

civilians as human shields and yes there are problems with Saudi air

strikes, they are killing civilians but that provides a more balanced

picture of how this is occurring. Indeed it does and I will seeking to

absolutely be balanced in making the point that very serious allegations

have been made against the Houthis and I gave two examples of that and

I reiterate the point of the UN panel which is that there are 185

alleged abuses, that is why this motion argues for an independent

investigation. Into all those alleged abuses. I'm not going to

have time to answer all the questions. On this point and I

didn't want to interrupt his speech, the House is learning a lot from it,

I hope you will concede this panel of experts have put this report

together didn't actually visit the country in order to put this report

together and we need to put that into context when monitoring and

understanding what's going on, don't ignore it but somehow we should add

value, they did not enter the country, they couldn't provide the

necessary intelligence we do expect from a panel of UN experts. They

didn't enter the country because of the challenges in the country that

I've been describing, didn't wilfully decide we're not going to

bother going on, with 185, this was based on serious work done by the

United Nations and am disappointed that the minister is so dismissive

of that. This is important because it does get used as a line to say

there are over 100, the Ministry of Defence has looked at every single

one of them and there were a number of them which we've asked for more

information but to clarify and give information to the House, sorry to

labour the point, but it was done on aerial photography with months in

between, therefore we cannot ascertain unless we have more

information as to whether these actual acts of atrocities were

caused by the Houthis or the coalition themselves, that's the

point and try to make. I agree with that and that's precisely why the

motion says that we should have a fully independent international

investigation into all allegations against both sides and it may well

be that some of these violations have been committed by the Houthis,

I didn't say 105 offences by the Saudi led coalition, alleged abuses

by them and the Houthis. In supporting the honourable member,

the UN panel were blocked by the Houthis from entering and the UN

panel explained that in the report that the tide of living to get it.

The Houthis also block the peace negotiators from leaving to go to

Geneva for the peace talks as well. The Houthis have been complicit in

creating this problem. He is absolutely right, I have heard

nobody in all of these debates and discussions, in the international

development committee suggesting the Houthis not to blame and that's why

the proposal is that we should haven't investigation into abuses in

all sides of this conflict. Maybe my honourable friend will be coming on

to this, but the discussions seems to be going on the basis of the

Saudi led coalition versus the Houthis comma is this not rather

missing the very unhelpful and sinister role played by the

Iranians, particularly in providing conventional weaponry and without

going into the data, I would suspect that many more people have been

killed, injured and dispossessed by the use of conventional weaponry of

which there is steady pipeline coming into Yemen from Iran when

actually by our action. I have already mentioned the role of Iran

in supporting the Houthis and any independent international UN led

investigation would certainly address the issue of Iranian

involvement but I reiterate the point I just made which is the UN

High Commissioner for human rights has estimated that two thirds of all

the civilian deaths in Yemen have actually been caused by the Saudi

led coalition. Indeed, isn't one of the very reasons why we need a full

independent investigation that were not clear about what has been

assessed and by who. The Saudis haven't given reports back on the

vast majority of the allegations that have been made whether they are

correct or not and were not clear what the government has or has not

assessed and they change their position an abrupt end on whether

they have taken an assessment or not. It needed corrections to the

House and have been revealed that they make mistakes in the efforts

they provided us. That enables me now to move the

timeline. I'm not going to give way because I want to move on to the

timeline. I'm not going to give way because I want to move on to the

United Nations human rights Council discussed Yemen in September 20 15.

The government of the Netherlands tabled a motion to the human rights

Council that would have mandated what this motion is proposing. 16

months ago the Netherlands tabled a motion that would have set up a

mission to document violations by all sides of the conflict since it

began. The Netherlands withdrew the draft on September 30, 2015, and

instead the Human Rights Council adopted a resolution tabled by Arab

states which deleted calls for an independent enquiry. On the 24th of

November 2015, the Foreign Office minister told this House that Saudi

Arabia was investigating reported allegations of IHL. Saying, these

investigations must be concluded, the situation on the ground is very

difficult and in many cases we are unable to verify what is happening

on the ground. We are wanting to encourage Saudi Arabia and other

parties that are involved and we want these cases looked into

efficiently and properly by the country itself. That is 14 months

ago. On the 3rd of February last year, almost a year ago, during

questions the right honourable gentleman the former Difid minister

said the government was supporting the implementation of the Human

Rights Council resolution and he said the government of Yemen should

investigate violations of international humanitarian law. The

following day, during a business debate, the Foreign Office minister

said again he had raised this issue directly with the government of

Saudi Arabia. That is almost a year ago. Then we conducted our first

enquiry as a committee. On July the 8th, last year, the government

published its response to the report. The government response

said, the UK Government is not opposing calls for an international

independent investigation into the alleged breaches of IHL. But, first

and foremost, we want to see the Saudi Arabian government investigate

allegations of breaches of IHL which are attributed to them. That is six

months ago. In August, following the corrections to which my honourable

friend referred, I wrote to the Foreign Secretary regarding these

corrections that have been given to P Qs and Westminster Hall debates

regarding allegations of investigations of IHL. The Foreign

Office's response reiterated what had been said in response to our

enquiry, in other words that the Saudis should investigate. Last

September during an urgent question tabled by my right honourable friend

the member for Leeds Central, the minister said Saudi Arabia as to

conduct thorough and conclusive investigations into incidents where

it is alleged to breach IHL, and praise the fact that Saudi Arabia

had released the results of eight reports in the previous month. That

was four months ago. Then in October during an adjournment debate tabled

by my right honourable friend from Leicester East, the Dfid Minister of

State reiterated that Saudi Arabia needs to be the party that

investigates violations. We are very clear that the investigation needs

to be led in the first instance by the Saudis. The government

repeatedly, over the last 14 months, have been asked about Saudi Arabia's

investigations. To my knowledge, Saudi Arabia have produced nine

reports on violations. Even though there have been many other

allegations made. Progress, I believe, on this is glacial. I find

it remarkable that the government still holds the line that Saudi

Arabia must take responsibility for investigating its own alleged

violations. I give way to the Minister. Forgive me for

interrupting again but I think it's helpful to provide further clarity

as he developed his own argument. Firstly on the Human Rights Council

itself and the formation of texts, we've seen this at the UN security

Council more recently with resolution 2334. It is consensus

that eventually leads to a text that is agreed by everybody so it can

actually pass. Secondly, it just to test your patience, to say that

absolutely these reports have been far too slow. The reason it is

because we are dealing with a country that has never written a

report like this in their lives and they are having to learn the hard

way to show the transparency that the international community expects.

I thank the Minister for those points of clarification which I

appreciate. Of course I recognise the way in which United Nations

bodies, whether the Human Rights Council or the Security Council,

operate. The point I was seeking to make was that the original text from

the Netherlands would have enabled the investigation to begin over a

year ago, because of the diplomacy hasn't happened. My argument today

is that that has been a missed opportunity. We could have started

at a much earlier stage. The point I would like to make which was made by

my honourable friend, is this process is slow because we are

talking about a fledgling state. Saudi Arabia. This is still a very

young state which is not used to this level of scrutiny and

transparency. And so it will take a long time for these reports to come

out. The honourable lady anticipates the final remarks I want to make in

this speech because she used the word slow, the minister used the

word slow, I used the word glacial. I think it is glacial, it is too

slow. The substantial point I look forward to the Minister responding

to when he speaks in the debate, at what point will the British

government take the view that we need to move to an independent

enquiry? I quoted from six months ago the government saying that the

British government is not opposed to calls for an independent

international enquiry, but first and foremost we want to see the Saudi

Arabian government investigate. We've had that for 14 months. How

much longer do we have to wait before we can move to an independent

investigation? I wonder whether he and others are aware that the MoD

had delivered two training sessions in Saudi Arabia on the process of

investigating alleged violations of international humanitarian law. I'm

sure he'd hoped that during those training sessions the MoD underlined

the importance of dealing with these matters in an expedited manner.

Absolutely and I'm sure the Minister will have more to say on that. Of

course, if that is the purpose of those sessions, and it is reminding

all parties they have obligations, it is vital that that happens. My

belief, and the view that was taken not just by the International

Development Committee but other select committees of this House, was

that we will only get the full investigation that we need if it is

completely independent. I think the time has come, has more than, and is

long overdue, for us as a country to move to support a fully independent,

international investigation. It is not acceptable for us to wait

indefinitely for the Saudi Arabians to conduct their own investigations

while people are still dying in this conflict. In talking about an

enquiry, Morocco have 15 jets, Jordan have 15 jets. It's not Saudi

Arabia, it's the Arab League as well. UAE have 30 jets and are they

involved in this enquiry? As I made clear throughout every intervention

on this, the enquiry will be into all allegations made against any

party to the conflict. It is quite clear that the Saudis lead this

coalition and for their alleged violations, they will be

investigated. My honourable friend reminded us earlier the Iranians

will also require investigation as well. Very briefly, who dropped the

bomb is then? In the allegations, who do we know who dropped these air

strikes? Predominately Saudi Arabia, there is little doubt about that.

The Saudis have the predominant airpower. But it isn't only about

the alleged violations that involve airpower, it is about all of the

alleged violations including shelling by the Houthis, that must

be investigated, actions by all sides. That is the purpose of saying

today that we want to see an independent international

investigation. I'll finish with this. I think this motion enables us

as a house to come together. It enables us to put to one side the

different points of view there are on the question of UK arms sales to

Saudi Arabia and others, this motion is not about that. And I reiterate

that while the International Development Committee and the

business select committee took one view on arms sales and the Foreign

Affairs Committee took a different view on arms sales, all three

committees took the view we should have an independent, UN led

investigation. I think today provides this House an opportunity

to send a very clear message to the government but also to the wider,

international community, that we want to see progress, in fact, we

want to seek urgent and immediate progress to enable a fully

independent investigation to take place. The question is on the order

paper. Before I call the next person to speak it will be obvious to the

House that there will be a great many people who wish to speak this

afternoon, that there is limited time. I would like to try not to

impose a time limit because the debate flows better if we don't have

a time limit. I trust honourable members to behave in a courteous

manner to their colleagues by speaking for around seven minutes.

If lots of people speak for considerably more than that, we will

have a time limit and that will be unfair to some people. I know that I

can trust Alistair Burt to begin. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker.

Could I begin firstly by thanking the honourable gentleman the

chairman of the committee and his colleagues for a very thorough

report, that we are going to debate, for both committees and the way he's

introduced what is a difficult and complex situation. Please to welcome

my honourable friend Minister for the Middle East and International

development in their places and we will listen very carefully to their

responses. I start simply by saying I was Minister for the Middle East

between 2010 and 2013, I was also responsible for arms control within

the department. I have some background on these difficult

issues. I don't want to spend a huge amount of time on the humanitarian

statistics, simply because we are well aware of them. The honourable

gentleman got them into the public domain quite effectively. I'd also

like to thank very much the library of the House of Commons for

producing another excellent background brief. I'd also like to

thank Stephen O'Brien for his remarkable work through the UN

relief agency. Just a quote from him, to put one quite on the order

paper if I may. When he spoke about the recent attack on the funeral,

the attack took place against the backdrop of a desperately worsening

humanitarian situation, four out of every five of Yemen's 20 million

people in need of immediate assistance. He said, I was in Sana'a

and saw the heartbreaking situation for myself. Parents struggling to

put food in the mouths of their children once a date, entire

communities terrifyingly affected by conflict and without access to basic

services or livelihoods. The issue is always not simply the relief of

the humanitarian pressures. We can do more on that, that doesn't solve

the problem. I want to talk about the elements of the motion of the

conflict and the impact on civilians, and how this conflict can

be resolved. To me, that is the most important thing. If the humanitarian

crisis is to be ended it is through an the conflict. I am exceptionally

fond of Yemen. My visit from 2010-2013 not only introduced me to

some of the leaders there, but also in 2011 some of the young people,

some of the women in the squares in Sana'a who helped to start to change

the country then. Things haven't gone well and the people of Yemen

have been betrayed once again by those who have responsibility for

them in their own country. I hope the spark of reform that was there

is not lost in the Yemen of the future. And I hope that the

political settlement which will eventually come, will include those

who hadn't been included in the past. Because they have a role to

play. The reason we have the conflict is because of that betrayal

in the past, the manipulation of all sites in the conflict, of various

conflicts over a length of time. The ability to use aid money that went

into the country for the wrong purposes. The failure of governance,

the failure of a process to deal with internal grievances that

included the Houthis, all of this has led to a situation where it

suits some to continue the conflict internally but the cost is borne by

the people of Yemen. It is essential that we recognise and understand

that. It is understandable from the outside that we focus on the

humanitarian crisis, and also to a degree, that we focus on the role of

Saudi Arabia. It is essential to recognise that if we want to make a

difference, we have to look at and understand why the conflict has

persisted as long as it has. The reason it exists is because it

exists on the back of that civil strife that has been going on a long

time. It exists because Yemen is generally

important, it matters, it shouldn't be forgotten, it shouldn't be

forgotten country. In the busy humanitarian sense, this is a

country of art, culture, music, this is a country of gentle people who

given a great deal to the world, it's terrible that in our time we

associated with the conflict that we do. Secondly its geographical

position, it overlooks important ceilings and the Houthis have attack

ships in the area. If there's an stability in the region it matters

to us. This may be a far-away place of which many people may not know

very but it matters. Accordingly its location, the ability to exploit

that ungoverned space by Al-Qaeda which can direct attacks towards us

and others in the West, it becomes increasingly a matter of concern and

importance to us and the instability in the region generally, none of us

in the House need any further information about that.

Understanding that gives us an understanding of why the coalition

came together, quite it needs a UN resolution and wind the United

Kingdom has an involvement. The kingdom of Saudi Arabia is directly

affected by instability in Yemen. Firstly, it can be and has been

physically attacked between 2015 and 2016 some 37 ballistic missiles were

fired by Houthi rebels to Saudi Arabia inflicting damage. Sometimes

it's got to be purely an internal issue in Yemen and the Houthis not

considered to be well armed but they are indeed. These micelles supplied

by North Korea in the 90s have a range of 300 kilometres and are

being shot down by US Patriot defence missile systems procured by

Saudi Arabia from the United States. As the honourable gentleman

indicates, there are serious armaments in the area and causing

concern to all sides and the reason why the coalition is there and I

would maintain that it is in the United Kingdom's interest to

continue to support the coalition to support the partners in the

coalition and to recognise what is being challenged there. It is not

only the loss of a democratically supported government but it's the

degree of influence has already been mentioned by Iraq. The Iranians have

said publicly that they see the city is yet another B Holt and the risk

and of that is a regime with a very clear intent to destabilise the

region, to use terrorism to do so and to threaten stability in other

areas. The consequence of that, not only an unstable region but for

those outside is that the degree of risk to United Kingdom and others is

increased. Accordingly the outcome of this conflict, if it is a

conflict in which Iranians are successful and terrorism are

successful is not in the United Kingdom's interest. The honourable

member mentions less than 20 scud strikes which are to be deplored.

The coalition air forces are engaging in 150 air strikes and more

per day was that there is a disproportionality here which

everyone in this house should recognise. It's very easy for us in

these comfortable benches in Westminster to talk about a

disproportionality and a conflict far away. The point I'm making to

the honourable gentleman is that in the Andy King we've had a focus on

the activities of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia without truly

understanding why it's engages, why the coalition is there and by the

United Kingdom has an interest in this and I simply wanted to put that

on the record, it does not in any way minimise the reason and the need

for humanitarian law to be respected, for the activities of

those who engage in warfare to conduct according to the rules but

it does come into the argument which is really made as to why on earth we

are engaged anyway and why the outcome of it matters to do United

Kingdom. Just finally. I have enormous respect for him and his

experience and listening very carefully to what he has to say but

for me the crucial issue here is about respect for international and

humanitarian law, what is his answer to the point that I raised and what

point would be like to look at these matters independently rather than

leaving it to the Saudis to lead the investigation? I think that point

comes when the United Kingdom government is not satisfied that the

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia can fulfil its obligations. At that stage I

don't believe that position has been reached. I'm sure the minister will

talk about the nature of our engagement with the Saudi Arabia and

how it affects as he says a state and indeed a group of states through

the GCC that are engaged in a conflict in a manner they haven't

been before. There is an important point, if we expect people another

part of the world to be responsible for their own defence and security

then they are going to have to get on with it and they're learning some

of the processes, that is happening at present and secondly the nature

of our engagement, I refer all colleagues to the report by Frank

Gardner of the BBC just before Christmas he reported and published

something on the BBC website, it's very good, most of us recognise that

Frank Gardner is a pretty independent voice parties looked at

the nature of engagement, the openness of the Saudi authorities in

dealing with him, explaining what they do, the openness of the Foreign

Minister Saudi Arabia coming to this house of which any member of this

chamber had access to to talk about these issues to question in a manner

not before is an important step forward. So everything we know is by

no means perfect, by no means clear but the steps that have been taken

by the British Government to encourage full disclosure have been

important. I must close because Madam Deputy Speaker was generous

and I want to finish on this. We are beginning to learn that the

importance of ending a conflict is paramount to the people who are

affected by it but there are good outcomes and their are less than

good outcomes and unless we are involved is something we can see

outcomes to conflict that are not in our long-term interest and not in

the interest of stability in the area, that is why we should continue

to support our allies who are working through the coalition,

continue to be engaged fully with them and to recognise that Aaron 's

rest is lie in a situation where does not create a terrorist cell in

Yemen, does not see Hezbollah type operation active in Yemen and that

those states that Opel is that a right to consider that their

long-term stability and ours is best satisfied by a solution which ends

the conflict and puts in place a democratic government supported by

you many is and political process, not the outside interference of

Iran. If anyone should be allowed to

exceed their six minutes as the honourable member for North East

Bedfordshire. He's worth all the minutes that he speaks about this

very important subject because we recognise those of us who'd been in

the all-party Yemen group and I've chaired it or almost as long as

President Szalai was president of Yemen, 26 years. He has always been

when he was in government and indeed now he's out of government very

aware of the importance of this beautiful country and his personal

concern that it is being hacked and it is suffering every single day. He

describes Yemen as the forgotten war. I'm extremely proud of being a

member of this house because what has been very clear over the last

few months is that Yemen is not the forgotten war in this house. Foreign

Office questions on Tuesday of this week, 48 hours ago, 26 minutes in

total of the 45 minutes available work dedicated to some aspect of the

situation in Yemen. In addition to members of the all-party group, the

member for Portsmouth South, a fellow we hosted Yemen day for the

first time in a number of years when we had excellent speeches from the

two ministers representing the government today. From

one importantly we could interact with members of the year

Yemeni community. It's the people of Yemen who are suffering. It's the

families of the people of Yemen who live in different parts of this

country, some in Liverpool, I'm not sure if any in Warwick in Leamington

but I'm so pleased that the honourable member has co-sponsored

this debate but they're all over the country and they feel powerless to

do what they need to do in order to bring this matter to the attention

of this house and the international community. So I'm delighted that yet

again we're having a debate on Yemen and that this on Thursday afternoon,

when it is not usually this well attended, so many members are coming

and we probably could have had a much longer debate mad and they

probably could have had a much longer debate Madam Vicky the

Speaker. I want to confine my remarks -- Madam Deputy Speaker. I

want to convey the urgency of a ceasefire and the importance of a

ceasefire and well, the Shadow Foreign Secretary said at Foreign

Office questions on Tuesday and the focus of the opposition fund which

is also the focus of the government. I hate it when we fight over Yemen,

whether it is on party lines on whether it is about the role of

Saudi Arabia or what is happening as far as the investigations are

concerned and we clearly need investigations as the motion

suggests. I want is desperately to unite behind one concept, the

importance of the ceasefire. A few weeks ago I was at the UN security

council because of the ability of Matthew Rycroft to get

parliamentarians in, I watched my fights ever after 30 years in this

house, my first-ever live session of the security Council and every

single member of the security council wanted to do something in

support of a ceasefire. It was unanimous. All the permanent

members, everybody, they had little digs at each other and asked for a

role but the most important thing is that all the countries spoke with

one voice. And that's why it's so important that the draft resolution

that is really our resolution because we are at the pen holders

should be tabled before the United Nations as a matter of urgency. And

I know what the Minister said to the shadow minister that really terrible

resolutions when we know they will be implemented but I don't have the

figures as to how many resolutions of the UN have actually been

implemented. They have got about 2500. But the fact is we need that

resolution because the best way to guarantee that people are focusing

on the peace process and the ceasefire is if the United Nations

speaks with one voice. That is why I seek a timetable from the government

today a timetable to ensure that we get that resolution for the Security

Council. I was delighted with the ceasefire that was brokered over

Syria that the Russians and the Turks were able to make sure we had

peace in Syria. That was wobbly but this was followed by the UN

endorsing the ceasefire. If you can have it in Syria, why can't we have

it in Yemen? And if we take the Foreign Secretary at his word and

I'm very pleased with the role he's played and the honesty with which

the Foreign Secretary has spoken about Yemen, then the British

Foreign Secretary working with the new Secretary of State and with the

Russians who are now the friends of the Americans or will be after the

20th of January, the Chinese will go along with it, I met the Chinese

ambassador recently and asked if China would support the ceasefire

and he said they would and the French are on board. Five permanent

members are going to be on board and the other countries are so

supportive, I think we can get this through. So pleased when he replies

could he tell us when that timetable is going to be achieved. My final

point is about the aid agencies, the chairman of the International

Development Select Committee has read out the scorecard a shame, the

3.3 million women and children who are malnourished, the 370,000

children who are in immediate risk of starvation, the 7 million who do

not know where their next meal is coming from, the 10 million who have

no access to safe drinking water, the four fifths of the entire

population, 21 million, equivalent to the populations of London,

Birmingham, Liverpool and Glasgow combined who are in desperate need

of urgent assistance and these incredible organisations from

medicines through to Islamic relief, the world foundation of KF IMC.

Oxfam, the disasters emergency fund, all these people trying as the

honourable member, another person who knows about Yemen so well when

he served there, where is the aid going, the aid cannot get in

effectively unless the planes land at Sana'a and unless the ports can

accept the aid. We have to have a ceasefire. If there is a goal I have

this year and my new Year 's resolution, if we can have a

collective New Year 's resolution for the House is that by the 31st of

December we will have peace in Yemen a proper political solution and

until we get that members of this house will continue to raise this

subject so the forgotten war is never forgotten and we bring peace

to this beautiful Oedipal country. -- beautiful. Stewart.

The south-east tip of the Arabian Peninsular has been a matter of

importance to us for at least 200 years. It was crucial to the

functioning of the British Empire, and particularly after 1869 with the

Suez Canal opening, when the route to India was much shorter. When oil

came to replace coal, Aden became even more important. Time passed and

the Aden Protectorate became part of our Empire. And indeed the British

government had to ruin it through 23 sheikdoms, tribal areas. These

tribal areas, 23 of them, were not great friends with one another, and

that remains to this day. We can't just think of them, as the Houthis,

they are all different tribes. That's the problem, that's where I

came in. In the 50s when the honourable gentleman and his sister

were born, when I was there in Aden... LAUGHTER I understand you

were born there and your sister might not have been? I'm sorry, the

honourable gentleman's system might not have been. I was definitely not

born there and I was a little boy there. My father was with the Aden

Protectorate and... I give way. The worst thing about giving an

intervention from the sedentary position is the honorary gentleman

didn't hear what I said. We were both born there. It's just he said

we were born when he arrived in Aden I was just making the point the two

events weren't connected! LAUGHTER Thank God for that! My interest in

Aden comes from my time when I was a little boy. I loved the place. It

was a great place to grow up between 1954-57. What a fabulous place to

be, if you were on the right side. Since 1990 Yemen has gone from bad

to worse and has become a sort of cockpit which some say is a fighting

area between the two branches of Islam. That may be the case but

don't think they are oh no -- they are the same on both sides, they are

not. It does stretch credulity the uranium regime has defined the

Houthis as Shia -- rode the Irani and regime. It is more mischief

making Barnby Orthodox theological position. And into that cockpit,

more mischief making comes with the arrival of AQAP and Daesh. These are

not native to Yemen. These are not people who really should be a

Yemeni. These are people who came in from outside. And actually, it is a

great tragedy that the Security Council resolution 2316, which was

passed unanimously, has not had much effect. In a way it is a disgrace on

the world. It had so little effect. I give way again to a gentleman who

talk such sense on this subject. You referred to Isis, of course prices

are developing in a vacuum. What the UN panel identified was where this

vacuum exists, where the Houthis threaten from one side and there is

no stabilisation force on the ground, that people, towns,

communities, are turning to the black flag as a way of community

against what is a sub sect of Shia, the Houthis, coming at them. They

are using it as a defence mechanism. That is the problem, an absence of

any government and people wanting to protect themselves. As ever it's the

little people who are suffering in this war. 7000 people have died,

apparently. To me, that rings bells with a number of people killed at

Srebrenica which I was kind of involved with all those years ago.

When Srebrenica occurred, the world suddenly got its backside in gear

and sorted it out. I go back to my original point, which is let's hope

2017 sort this out. Because clearly, Madam Deputy Speaker, there is a

political solution that must be had somewhere rather. Firstly, people

have got to meet both sides have got to meet. They've tried and it's very

difficult, but that's the only way forward. This diplomat from

Mauritius seems to be respected on all sides. That is the first thing

you require, a chairman or chairwoman who is respected.

Negotiations must actually be protected. My second point is that

those people negotiating should be able to do so in safety. They've had

some problems in the Gulf, so perhaps moved to Geneva, the

traditional place for negotiations if necessary. The third point must

be a ceasefire that will hold. The recognition of ceasefires, is that

although they are written on paper, they inevitably won't hold. They

will never be perfect and therefore we almost should expect the -- that

if there is a ceasefire there there will be breaches and we've got to

live with that. I will give way. As the honourable gentleman been able

to seek the draft text of the resolution the British have drafted

and not yet put before the Security Council? Clause one calls for a

ceasefire and references the UN route map. Has the honourable

gentleman seen up and agree that maybe the basis for negotiations? I

haven't read it but it sounds very sensible and logical. Everything has

got to be sensible and logical in sorting out problems. Of course I've

already alluded to the fact, AQAP and Daesh are not local. There is a

point of joint between the protagonists, they all hate these

people who have come in from outside. They are part of the enemy

and they should not be involved. My fifth points is that we should

withdraw, there should be a withdrawal of Armed Forces from

Sana'a and other towns. This will be very difficult but it probably

involves the fact we require UN peacekeepers of some sort. I think

of the model of the British going into Rhodesia and separating people.

That's good. We can't do it because whoever the peacekeepers are,

probably should be from an Islamic State. But good, military officers,

and good, military troops, should go in, if there is to be some kind of

resolution. The UN will have two grip this one. Obviously a political

solution is the objective. I very much hope that this year we will get

it. For goodness sake, if Yemen is a forgotten war, colleagues, if Yemen

is a forgotten war, let's not make it forgotten and let's actually make

it a forgotten war by next year because it's over. Thank you. Mike

Gibbs. Madam Deputy Speaker I, unlike several who have spoken in

the debate already, have never been to Yemen. But I was last September

in demand. What is interesting about Oman which has a border with Yemen,

is that Oman has managed in a very difficult situation to stay out of

this conflict. The Iranians are trying to smuggle weaponry into

Yemen through Oman. Yemenis fleeing from the conflict are being treated

in Omani hospitals. And there is a potential for the issue to have a

wider role. Interestingly, and this is probably not widely known, the

Omanis are not or Sunni, they are a particularly small group of people,

and they have a particular distinctive position within the

history of Islam. But so did the group we now call the Houthis.

Although it is quite clear that this is a regional conflict with Saudi

Arabia and the GCC countries, and as my friend said, countries from North

Africa also involved as part of the UN mandated comic UN supported

coalition, on the other side you have Irani and Hezbollah, and

Hezbollah are commanders -- have commanders who died in Yemen. In a

sense, what we have seen in Syria with an alliance of a group who

worry particular branch, close to Houthis but complicated -- Shiism

but complicated, in alliance with Iran and Russia. In the Yemen we

have something similar. We have a coalition of Sunni governments,

supporting a government which is weak, in what has become a failed

state. On the other side you've got a coalition with the former

President, meddling and refusing to accept the transition to the new

government. Former President. You are in a position where the idea of

a political solution is probably even more difficult than Syria.

Because the United States is not in any real position to influence the

outcome here, whereas Russia has an influence in Syria. This potentially

has serious ramifications. The Houthis fired missiles at ships of

the United Arab Emirates. They also fired missiles at the United States

naval vessels. There is a potential of the widening of this conflict,

and as a regional security issue, it is quite right that the United

Nations Security Council has too engage with it. The situation,

however, is not one where we can simply say that Saudi Arabia and

Irani can solve this. Because the actors internally are not simply

proxies for Irani Saudi Arabia. Therefore, to crudely say we should

condemn the British government's support to the Saudis, or, on the

other side, we should condemn the Iranians's support for the Houthis,

is not going to take us anywhere. And I suspect, sadly, even if we

were to have a regional deal whereby Irani and Saudi Arabia have a big

bargain, and they agree a common position on the Israel Palestine

conflict, you would still find this conflict in Yemen might still be

continuing because of these factors. It needs urgency, international

involvement, and remember, these people are amongst the very poorest

people in the wilds. They are suffering not just warfare, but they

are also suffering terrible poverty, partly because of mismanagement and

misgovernment over many years. Chris White. Thank you. I am pleased to

have secured this debate alongside the honourable member for Liverpool

West Derby and bank the Backbench Business Committee for granting us

this opportunity. The conflict in Yemen between the Saudi led

coalition and the Houthi rebels has created grave instability and

danger. Amnesty International has stated the conflict has seen

violations of international humanitarian law committed by both

sides with impunity. UN reports suggest around 60% of air strikes

during the war have been conducted by Saudi led forces. The committees

on arms airport controls had an enquiry last year on the sale of UK

arms to Saudi Arabia. It is clear to me that there is an urgent need for

the government to suspend such licences, pending the results of an

independent UN led investigation into potential breaches of

international humanitarian law. This was the position taken by the joint

report of the Business, Innovation and Skills and international

development select committees, in conclusion of that enquiry.

Meanwhile, since the report, the government has repeated its view

that the Saudis should be allowed to conduct their own investigations.

is a Saudi led joint incidents assessment team has only initiated

something around 15 investigations, almost two years into the conflict.

The number of credible allegations are well over 100. Furthermore,

feedback that the team is limited to press releases and press conferences

rather than comprehensive reports. During the Defence Secretary in a

statement on the 19th of December I ask my right honourable friend the

circumstances under which the government would pause arms sales to

Saudi Arabia. If we have evidence of international humanitarian law being

breached, I point to the devastating twin attack on the funeral hall in

Sana'a killing 140 and injuring as many as 500. According to UN the

attacks were minutes apart targeting a location where it was known that

senior Houthi officials were assembling between families and

children. The US has launched a review into that attack and have a

position as guided munitions worth around $350 --'s $50 million citing

systemic and endemic problems with Saudi targeting in Yemen. -- $350

million. For an attack to not be able to distinguish those fighting

in a conflict and civilians points to international humanitarian law

being broken. We should be an example with our licensing regime

the response of these challenges. Criteria of our arms export

licensing regime are busy authorisation to arm themselves if

there is a clear risk of a violation of international humanitarian law. I

asked the minister and his response today what point is this threshold

met. The evidence that the committee of arms export controls heard was

the compelling in suggesting that this is very much a clear risk. I

have heard arguments that claim if we don't supply arms a nation with a

weaker licensing regime will do so instead. I would pre-empt any such

point today and suggest this is no way to approach any situation, not

least the sale of weapons. We must be accountable for our own actions,

particularly if we are to be an example in cementing. Cementing the

rule of law into our practices was that such a position does not fulfil

our obligations of the criteria and the law and unless we wish to become

one of these other weaker countries we should maintain that position. A

legal opinion in December 2015 by matrix Chambers argues that the sale

of UK arms constitutes a violation of our obligations under national,

international and EU law. I pre-empt the widely recognised point that our

strategic relationship with Saudi Arabia is one that must be

maintained. I absolutely agree with this position but would say that

this does not extend to as acting as its proxy defence. We pride

ourselves in a relationship with Saudi Arabia but that must not be a

mechanism to deflect criticism. Our close ties should not be used to

support... Thank you very much for giving way. The primary purpose of

this debate on my own personal feelings is the people of Yemen and

the objective is clear. It is a ceasefire. That's the primary

objective in order to relieve the situation in Yemen. Stopping arms

sales to Saudi Arabia as a bogus argument and will put to him this,

you've seen the arms sales of Russians to President Assad and you

seen the devastation in Aleppo. I find it incredible that you can make

the argument about ethical arms sales and our ethical arms sales and

then allow Saudi Arabia using our petrol pounds to go and buy arms for

whoever they want and you see the devastation if they were to buy

Russian arms in Aleppo, it's a ridiculous argument. Thank you for

the final point. I would suggest were the honourable member talks

about ethics, he is missing my point entirely. This is not necessarily

about ethics, this is about the rule of law and the criteria for our arms

exports licensing carrot here are -- criteria. Would you still might like

to make a point? I would echo the comments of my Lancashire neighbour.

Also, the question of the relationship with Saudi Arabia, with

the honourable gentleman not recognise that through the good

offices of government ministers like the Minister in his place, the

behaviour of Saudi Arabia has changed and accepting they are no

longer going to use cluster bombs. I would answer very briefly to say

that the government had already been in discussions with Saudi Arabia

regarding cluster munitions in 2010 and I don't think the Saudi Arabian

government took a large amount of notice of our government persuasion

until after the events when these munitions were identified. The chair

of the committee is making a strong speech and I wonder if he agrees

with me that there's a much wider principle, this house on both sides

and governments have led the world in arguing for the arms trade is

treated and the other arms export control criteria so we have a rules

-based system for our defence industry to operate within, one that

adheres to humanitarian principles. Does he not agree that principle is

at stake if we don't adhere to it? I'm sorry, I'm probably getting well

past the Deputy Speaker's patients. The Defence Secretary's statement on

the 19th, to go back to the specific question learned that the

government's findings that British made cluster munitions had been used

by the Saudi led coalition in May 20 16. This has a number of

implications as is cause for concern but challenged the Minister on the

responsiveness of our exports resume. It's on unacceptable that an

international ally uses a weapon manufactured in Britain with

complete disregard for the 2008 Convention on cluster munitions of

which the UK is a signatory. I will continue, my apologies. If I get a

strange look I will give way shortly. We are duty bound by the

2008 Convention to prevent use of cluster munitions and die as what

steps were taken to him as the Saudis of our opposition of the use

and convince them to decommission these weapons. I recognised the

government has not sold cluster munitions to Saudi Arabia since 1989

but it is important to consider the durability of arm munitions. I will

give way. We do know that the UK Government stopped supplying cluster

munitions to Saudi Arabia in 1989. However we also know that the UK

Government continued to maintain those horrific weapons until 2010,

now that the minister will tell us why that contract was in place for

21 years but the crucial point I think is and does the member agreed

me that the accountability should extend beyond simply sales but

maintenance contract also. I would agree with the honourable member

that it will be instinctive year the Minister's response for that. The

humanitarian crisis requires an urgent and comprehensive response

from the international community. Everyone in this chamber agrees with

that. As each month goes by and casualties grow, the case for an

independent UN led investigation into potential breaches becomes all

the more compelling from a UK perspective and to protect our

reputation, an example to the world in terms of arms export licences, it

is right we suspend our sale of arms to Saudi Arabia until the UN led

investigation is completed. Just before I call the next figure I

should remind the House a few honourable gentleman this afternoon

have used the word you when really they meant one or they should have

said the honourable gentleman or the honourable lady. Now I haven't

interrupted people because I don't wish to spoil the flow of their

arguments but it must be noted that that is inappropriate use of

language and the debate does work much better if we keep it in the

third person. Yemen is one of the oldest

civilisations within the Gulf. A unified Yemeni state was not formed

until 1990. I urge members to look at the timeline for this. It has a

history of war, assassinations, political, civil and internal

conflict and then thrown in earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and

landslides. It has a history and the toll of misery in many respects.

Then in 1992 along came Al-Qaeda. We have a little of Al-Qaeda initially

but then following the 2000 attack on the USS call violence grew from

Al-Qaeda. In 2009 Saudi and Yemeni branches merged to form Al-Qaeda in

the Arab and insular and the death toll has risen yearly. --

peninsular. The northern -based Houthis, the insurgency against the

government started to grow in 2004. The Houthis adhere to a branch of

Shia Islam. The president of Yemen following unification with the South

in 1990. He was forced to leave office in 2012, since when he's

fought alongside the Houthis two control Yemen. During his time in

power he amassed a fortune between 30 and 62 billion. The report claims

the assets including gold, cash, property and other commodities are

held in various names in at least 20 countries. In 2012 the President was

inaugurated as Houthis the took over large parts of the country. The

president is supported by the Gulf cooperation Council and the military

alliance said is often led by Saudi Arabia. In April 2015 the UN

security Council impose an arms embargo on Yemen's rebels and allies

including the former president and his son. That arms embargo has been

broken many times by the Iranians. The 2016 global terrorism index

lists Yemen as fitting the sixth highest level of terrorism in the

world. Of the 20 most fatal terrorist attacks in 2015, two were

in Yemen carried out by Houthi extremists. In 2015 1591 Yemen were

killed in terrorist attacks and the groups carried out 90% of the

attacks. The Houthi, Al-Qaeda and now a new group, the Isa affiliates.

Houthi Still claimed responsibility for 63% of the deaths and 62% of the

attacks. The majority of which targets private citizens and

property. There is no doubt that violence as Gulf Yemen. The country

has a history of conflict between its religious, ethnic groups. Its

leadership has a history of failing the ordinary people of Yemen. It is

naive to suggest that Yemen is not also a proxy battle for dominance

between Sunni and Shia powers of drawing in wealthier and more

powerful regional countries. The Houthi have also launched attacks on

Saudi Arabia, their neighbour. I'm not going to repeat all of the

information that we've had about the famine and disease and the death

toll is that we're seeing as a result of the conflict. This

disastrous situation has reached a stalemate.

Ceasefires and peace deals have been made and broken. There doesn't seem

to be any side that sees a real interest in reaching and maintaining

a settlement. In a region where the horrific barrel bombing of civilians

in Aleppo, a rising tide of refugees, murder, rape, torture is

of followers different religious groups are frequent, the warring

parties in the conflict have me Houthi no real impetus in getting

behind peace initiatives. The UN special envoy has worked hard, and I

appreciate that. There's little in the motion before us today that I

don't think anyone in house would not support. I'm not going to get

into a tit-for-tat argument about whether or not the Saudis are the

main problem here, is the coalition the problem here. The problem is, we

don't have a clear road map to resolve this conflict. I looked at

what I thought was a very, very good report from Chatham House. It's one

of the UK's best independent think tank. It is a group that can be

trusted to take an impartial view. They point out, as others have, that

the conflict is multipolar, fuelled by regional and international

support from various parties involved in the fighting. The broad

consensus among international policymakers is the it can be

brought to a sustainable end is through political mediation. But we

need to have tensions that are rife, not only between the two warring

factions, between the two ex-presidents, we need to tackle

those tensions, because the groups are also deeply divided. So, if you

come down on the side of the Houthi, or you come down on the other side,

ultimately an ongoing civil war will still emerge. We need a peace

process that is more inclusive. I have to say, I wish we would all

listen much more to the member for North East Bedfordshire who happens

to be one of the great experts in this region. There needs to be a

prioritised, elite, we need to move away from prioritising elite level

mediation and security concerns, particularly counterterrorism edged

tips, to look at the economic needs of the population --

counterterrorism initiatives. The process will need to give equal

right to bottom up, grassroots local approach to peace building,

alongside top-down, elite led interests, and ensure the political

security and economic tracts of the transition are interlinked rather

than dealt with separately. Failure to expand representation and to

focus on local government will lead to renewed hostilities at a local

level, that could push Yemen in a step closer to becoming a chaotic

state. There are many reasons why we in the UK need to look with great

attention at what is happening in Yemen. If you look at the map, Yemen

sits on a narrow waterway linking the red Sea with the Gulf of Aden

through which most of the world's oil and trade traverses. Security

and stability in the Straits is vital to the whole of the world's

economies. Whoever controls the Straits has a potential stranglehold

on world colonies. This is a matter of urgent attention to the world. In

my view, it is only the United Nations that can speak on behalf of

the world. It is to the United Nations that we must turn, and to

the United Nations the responsibility for building that

bottom down, rather than top-down, coalition of support, for the people

of Yemen, is where we must give our support. Rather than dividing into

attacks on Saudi Arabia, attacks on Iran. Let's focus on the peace needs

of the people of Yemen. Colleagues have used this phrase forgotten war

a number of times during this debate. But like to pay to be to

many members on all sides of the House to keep bringing the issue of

Yemen back to the chamber to ensure it isn't forgotten. There is an

acute humanitarian crisis, I don't want to go over those details again,

many right honourable members who have spent time in Yemen have given

the details. I would like to put on record my thanks and all of ours to

the great contribution of our government the ?100 million of Dfid

money that has been spent... I can't unfortunately hear the sedentary

interventions. I'm very proud we have made that commitment to 0.7%.

It is a huge part, says a lot about the coalition government, this

government, and our commitment to be an outward looking, global nation.

Particularly after the referendum result. Stability and peace in

Yemen, it's what we are all here discussing, it is our aim, that's

what's right for the people of Yemen. I've had argued its greatly

in the interests of all our constituents as well. We've seen

that when you have a war zone, when there are failed states, that is

where these terrorist organisations thrive. It was Afghanistan, now it

was Syria. Where we've got Daesh was Syria. Where we've got Daesh

growing up, now they can't get any foothold in Syria they are moving

into Turkey. We are providing people who want to kill our constituents

with a training ground. The stability of that state can only be

in the best interests of how we achieve that. I'm very happy to give

way. I wholeheartedly agree, does she share my disappointment there

continued to be a small number of members in the House who continue to

say we should scrap the aid budgets, scrap Dfid? It is very much in our

national security interests and those people suffering in those

countries we continue to fund. I agree and I can see a bit of

cross-party love growing up. LAUGHTER I don't think he's going to

agree with the rest of my speech, but on this week totally agree. This

is having a profound affect on the people of Yemen but this has a

profound effect on the people of Saudi Arabia and the wider nation.

They are suffering from migration and the effects of disease,

terrorism on their borders. We've seen, and I've said before in my

intervention, Saudi Arabia is a state which has existed only in the

decades. It is a state that is in a state of transition. We had projects

from some of its leaders about how they will go to further democracy,

more representation from women. And from other groups. I think that as

an ally, we should support them in that and we should support their

government. I was heartened when the Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister came

and spoke to members before Christmas about his openness and

about how he recognised there is a great challenge in this country. We

do not want a situation where Jeddah and Riyadh are controlled by Daesh

or AQAP. This is a war which is legal, President Hardy, we can argue

about how effective he is as a leader, is the leader that. --

President Hadi. I know the honourable gentleman and I differ on

the role of selling armaments to Saudi Arabia and I would echo some

of the other comments on that. One must understand that relationships

that are brought up in the Middle East, they take a long time, they

rely on trust. We have to keep talking to people. And these

historical relationships through trade and diplomacy really do take

an awful long time. Has she seen the the European Council on foreign

relations that has said it is absolutely vital that Europe and the

EU keeps a good relationship with the GCC and the Arab League. That is

under 2216 and the intervention in Yemen. If we are to resolve this

problem, it is about relationships and building relationships, not

destroying relationships like the member for Warwick and Leamington

spa wants to do. I agree it is about relationships and it's about

influence and guidance. The arms export control, what is written in

the law is very important and my right honourable friend who was

instrumental in overseeing it when he was the minister, that is

important and we need to do that. All the Arms export it goes through

a rigorous process. The coalition which was their fighting, led by

Saudi Arabia but with aura vulnerable other Arab countries, is

defending its borders and its interest. Because we've heard since

what happened in the early 2000s that we want to get out of the

Middle East, they need to be self-sustaining, independent, more

democratic. I just need to finish this point before I lose my train of

thought! We need to allow them to do that with the guidance that one

would expect from an ally and a friend. Having our personnel back

explaining about compliance with international humanitarian law,

explaining about targeting, this is very important. Again, I don't