Latest news with #Malthouse
The National
a day ago
- Politics
- The National
Tory MP Kit Malthouse in stark 'Hague' warning to David Lammy over Gaza
Conservative former Home Office minister Kit Malthouse made the comments as the Foreign Secretary was delivering a statement to the House of Commons on the Middle East on Monday evening. In his speech, Lammy announced a £60 million humanitarian aid package for Gaza, which he said would be used to scale up food assistance programmes, water and sanitation services, and maternal and children's healthcare. READ MORE: IDF soldiers 'arrested at Tomorrowland festival over war crimes', campaign says But he stopped short of suggesting the UK would be recognising a Palestinian state – which he is under pressure from MPs to do so ahead of a UN conference at the end of this month – instead reiterating that the Government was committed to a two-state solution. After his speech, Malthouse told the Commons: "Speaker, like in this House, I'm frankly astonished at the statement of the Foreign Secretary. "At a time when we've got daily lynchings and expulsions on the West Bank, dozens being murdered as they beg for aid. "I'm just beyond words really at his inaction and frankly complicity by inaction at what is going on. "He himself said there's a massive prison camp being constructed in the south of Gaza. "He knows that leading genocide scholars from across the world now are ringing the alarm bells, and yet he has the temerity to show up to this House and wave his chequebook as if it's going to solve his conscience. "Can he not see that his inaction – and frankly, cowardice – is making this country irrelevant? "Can he also not see the personal risk to him, given our international obligations, that he may end up at The Hague because of his inaction? "And finally, really, frankly, an appeal to the Labour backbenches: We can't get your leadership to change their minds, only you can if you organise and insist on change." READ MORE: 'Horrendous': Kevin Bridges condemns Israeli attack at Gaza aid distribution site Lammy began to respond: "I understand the fury that the right honourable gentleman feels, but I have to tell him–" Malthouse then interrupted: "Why don't you feel it?" Lammy continued: "I have to tell him that it demeans his argument when he personalises it in the way that he does. "It is unbecoming, and not something the House expects, particularly of its more senior members." Meanwhile, on Tuesday morning, the Foreign Secretary continued to insist that the UK is not sending weapons to Israel which could be used in Israel, despite the continued export of F-35 parts. Lammy told Sky News: "I am satisfied that we are not sending arms that could be used in [[Gaza]], but we do send other things, for example, kit and equipment that is used by NGOs or journalists." When it was pointed out to him that the UK was continuing to export F-35 fighter jet parts, the Foreign Secretary admitted that this was "an exception", but that it was a "small" one. "We cannot guarantee that there are not parts in the global pool that we buy into that could be used in Gaza," he told Sky News. "That is the exception. It's a small exception, but I think your listeners will understand when there are other theatres of conflict, particularly here in Europe, that it is important that we don't bring down the whole of the F-35 arsenal across the world."
The National
a day ago
- Politics
- The National
David Lammy told he 'may end up in The Hague' due to Gaza 'cowardice'
Conservative former Home Office minister Kit Malthouse made the comments as the Foreign Secretary was delivering a statement to the House of Commons on the Middle East on Monday evening. In his speech, Lammy announced a £60 million humanitarian aid package for Gaza, which he said would be used to scale up food assistance programmes, water and sanitation services, and maternal and children's healthcare. READ MORE: IDF soldiers 'arrested at Tomorrowland festival over war crimes', campaign says But he stopped short of suggesting the UK would be recognising a Palestinian state – which he is under pressure from MPs to do so ahead of a UN conference at the end of this month – instead reiterating that the Government was committed to a two-state solution. After his speech, Malthouse told the Commons: "Speaker, like in this House, I'm frankly astonished at the statement of the Foreign Secretary. "At a time when we've got daily lynchings and expulsions on the West Bank, dozens being murdered as they beg for aid. "I'm just beyond words really at his inaction and frankly complicity by inaction at what is going on. "He himself said there's a massive prison camp being constructed in the south of Gaza. "He knows that leading genocide scholars from across the world now are ringing the alarm bells, and yet he has the temerity to show up to this House and wave his chequebook as if it's going to solve his conscience. "Can he not see that his inaction – and frankly, cowardice – is making this country irrelevant? "Can he also not see the personal risk to him, given our international obligations, that he may end up at The Hague because of his inaction? "And finally, really, frankly, an appeal to the Labour backbenches: We can't get your leadership to change their minds, only you can if you organise and insist on change." READ MORE: 'Horrendous': Kevin Bridges condemns Israeli attack at Gaza aid distribution site Lammy began to respond: "I understand the fury that the right honourable gentleman feels, but I have to tell him–" Malthouse then interrupted: "Why don't you feel it?" Lammy continued: "I have to tell him that it demeans his argument when he personalises it in the way that he does. "It is unbecoming, and not something the House expects, particularly of its more senior members." Meanwhile, on Tuesday morning, the Foreign Secretary continued to insist that the UK is not sending weapons to Israel which could be used in Israel, despite the continued export of F-35 parts. Lammy told Sky News: "I am satisfied that we are not sending arms that could be used in [[Gaza]], but we do send other things, for example, kit and equipment that is used by NGOs or journalists." When it was pointed out to him that the UK was continuing to export F-35 fighter jet parts, the Foreign Secretary admitted that this was "an exception", but that it was a "small" one. "We cannot guarantee that there are not parts in the global pool that we buy into that could be used in Gaza," he told Sky News. "That is the exception. It's a small exception, but I think your listeners will understand when there are other theatres of conflict, particularly here in Europe, that it is important that we don't bring down the whole of the F-35 arsenal across the world."
North Wales Chronicle
30-06-2025
- Politics
- North Wales Chronicle
MPs back Government bid to strip citizenship from ‘extremists' during appeals
Security minister Dan Jarvis described 'keeping our country safe' as an 'awesome task' as he called on MPs to support the Deprivation of Citizenship Orders (Effect during Appeal) Bill. If the proposal clears Parliament, alleged extremists who lose their British citizenship but win an appeal against the decision will not have it reinstated before the Home Office has exhausted all avenues for appeal. Mr Jarvis told the Commons: 'Of all the duties of Government, none matters more than keeping our country safe. 'It is an awesome task, and one to which we attach the utmost significance as this House and the public would expect. For people to flourish they must have confidence that they are safe as they go about their lives. 'For a society to excel, its values must be protected from harm and its laws upheld.' The minister later said: 'This Bill will protect the UK from people who pose a threat to our national security by preventing those who've been deprived of British citizenship and are overseas from returning until all appeals have been determined.' He added that where the Home Office is pursuing a person through the appeals process, the alleged extremist would be unable to renounce any other nationalities they might have until the Government runs out of road. Under existing laws, a person who wins an appeal could be released from immigration detention or returned to the UK while the Home Office considers further action. Mr Jarvis warned alleged extremists can renounce other nationalities and put 'themselves in a position whereby a deprivation order would render them stateless', limiting the UK Government's powers. He has received support from the Conservative frontbench, when Katie Lam said from the despatch box: 'Allowing potentially dangerous individuals to retain their citizenship while appeals are ongoing is absurd. 'This is not a power exercised lightly by any government, and the idea that dangerous people might escape accountability by exploiting procedure is frightening.' But Conservative former Home Office minister Kit Malthouse warned that the Bill appeared to 'breach a fundamental tenet', by turning the idea of 'innocent until proven guilty' on its head. Mr Malthouse said: 'If I'm accused of a crime and I am found innocent, and the prosecutors decide to appeal my conviction, I remain innocent – until that appeal is heard and decided against me. 'And if it's appealed beyond that, I remain innocent then still.' Turning to the wider deprivation of citizenship orders, which saw an average of 12 people a year lose their rights to a British passport on the grounds it was 'conducive to the public good' between 2018 and 2023, Mr Malthouse told MPs the system had 'created two classes of citizen in this country'. Shamima Begum, who travelled aged 15 from Bethnal Green, London, to territory held by the so-called Islamic State group a decade ago, is a well known example of the state's use of its powers. She was 'married off' to an IS fighter and was stripped of her British citizenship in February 2019. Mr Malthouse said he was a 'freeborn Englishman of two English parents going back I don't know how many years' with 'no claim on any other citizenship anywhere else'. He continued: 'It is my absolute, undeniable, unequivocal right to have citizenship in this country and it cannot be removed from me by any means whatsoever. 'That is not true of my children – I'm married to a Canadian citizen. They have a claim on Canadian citizenship. If the Home Secretary so decides, they can have their citizenship removed. 'That is true of every Jewish citizen of the United Kingdom who has a right to citizenship in Israel. There will be millions of British people of south Asian origin who feel that they have a second-class citizenship. 'This law only applies to certain of our citizens.' Bell Ribeiro-Addy said: 'I do not believe that citizenship is a privilege. I actually believe that it's a right.' The Labour MP for Clapham and Brixton Hill added: 'I want to understand why if somebody was such a huge threat to this country, we could not deal with them under other pieces of legislation.' She warned of a 'sense of nervousness amongst many communities when any legislation that touches and concerns citizenship is brought to this House', and said orders 'disproportionately' affect 'people of colour, or British-born or long-settled individuals whose heritage or ancestral links are outside of Europe'. Backing the Bill, Labour MP for Makerfield Josh Simons said that 'high streets full of vape shops, dog muck and smashed glass matter so much' as a 'visible and constant reminder that others seem not to feel they belong'. He described citizenship as 'belonging on a bigger scale – a larger us' and called for 'a modern citizenship regime – reform the ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights) and judicial review, establish digital ID or, for that matter, radically reform the British state'. Having backed the Bill at second reading, MPs will further scrutinise it in the Commons at a later date. The Bill does not change the reasons why a person could be deprived of their British status, nor their rights to an appeal.
Leader Live
30-06-2025
- Politics
- Leader Live
MPs back Government bid to strip citizenship from ‘extremists' during appeals
Security minister Dan Jarvis described 'keeping our country safe' as an 'awesome task' as he called on MPs to support the Deprivation of Citizenship Orders (Effect during Appeal) Bill. If the proposal clears Parliament, alleged extremists who lose their British citizenship but win an appeal against the decision will not have it reinstated before the Home Office has exhausted all avenues for appeal. Mr Jarvis told the Commons: 'Of all the duties of Government, none matters more than keeping our country safe. 'It is an awesome task, and one to which we attach the utmost significance as this House and the public would expect. For people to flourish they must have confidence that they are safe as they go about their lives. 'For a society to excel, its values must be protected from harm and its laws upheld.' The minister later said: 'This Bill will protect the UK from people who pose a threat to our national security by preventing those who've been deprived of British citizenship and are overseas from returning until all appeals have been determined.' He added that where the Home Office is pursuing a person through the appeals process, the alleged extremist would be unable to renounce any other nationalities they might have until the Government runs out of road. Under existing laws, a person who wins an appeal could be released from immigration detention or returned to the UK while the Home Office considers further action. Mr Jarvis warned alleged extremists can renounce other nationalities and put 'themselves in a position whereby a deprivation order would render them stateless', limiting the UK Government's powers. He has received support from the Conservative frontbench, when Katie Lam said from the despatch box: 'Allowing potentially dangerous individuals to retain their citizenship while appeals are ongoing is absurd. 'This is not a power exercised lightly by any government, and the idea that dangerous people might escape accountability by exploiting procedure is frightening.' But Conservative former Home Office minister Kit Malthouse warned that the Bill appeared to 'breach a fundamental tenet', by turning the idea of 'innocent until proven guilty' on its head. Mr Malthouse said: 'If I'm accused of a crime and I am found innocent, and the prosecutors decide to appeal my conviction, I remain innocent – until that appeal is heard and decided against me. 'And if it's appealed beyond that, I remain innocent then still.' Turning to the wider deprivation of citizenship orders, which saw an average of 12 people a year lose their rights to a British passport on the grounds it was 'conducive to the public good' between 2018 and 2023, Mr Malthouse told MPs the system had 'created two classes of citizen in this country'. Shamima Begum, who travelled aged 15 from Bethnal Green, London, to territory held by the so-called Islamic State group a decade ago, is a well known example of the state's use of its powers. She was 'married off' to an IS fighter and was stripped of her British citizenship in February 2019. Mr Malthouse said he was a 'freeborn Englishman of two English parents going back I don't know how many years' with 'no claim on any other citizenship anywhere else'. He continued: 'It is my absolute, undeniable, unequivocal right to have citizenship in this country and it cannot be removed from me by any means whatsoever. 'That is not true of my children – I'm married to a Canadian citizen. They have a claim on Canadian citizenship. If the Home Secretary so decides, they can have their citizenship removed. 'That is true of every Jewish citizen of the United Kingdom who has a right to citizenship in Israel. There will be millions of British people of south Asian origin who feel that they have a second-class citizenship. 'This law only applies to certain of our citizens.' Bell Ribeiro-Addy said: 'I do not believe that citizenship is a privilege. I actually believe that it's a right.' The Labour MP for Clapham and Brixton Hill added: 'I want to understand why if somebody was such a huge threat to this country, we could not deal with them under other pieces of legislation.' She warned of a 'sense of nervousness amongst many communities when any legislation that touches and concerns citizenship is brought to this House', and said orders 'disproportionately' affect 'people of colour, or British-born or long-settled individuals whose heritage or ancestral links are outside of Europe'. Backing the Bill, Labour MP for Makerfield Josh Simons said that 'high streets full of vape shops, dog muck and smashed glass matter so much' as a 'visible and constant reminder that others seem not to feel they belong'. He described citizenship as 'belonging on a bigger scale – a larger us' and called for 'a modern citizenship regime – reform the ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights) and judicial review, establish digital ID or, for that matter, radically reform the British state'. Having backed the Bill at second reading, MPs will further scrutinise it in the Commons at a later date. The Bill does not change the reasons why a person could be deprived of their British status, nor their rights to an appeal.
Rhyl Journal
30-06-2025
- Politics
- Rhyl Journal
MPs back Government bid to strip citizenship from ‘extremists' during appeals
Security minister Dan Jarvis described 'keeping our country safe' as an 'awesome task' as he called on MPs to support the Deprivation of Citizenship Orders (Effect during Appeal) Bill. If the proposal clears Parliament, alleged extremists who lose their British citizenship but win an appeal against the decision will not have it reinstated before the Home Office has exhausted all avenues for appeal. Mr Jarvis told the Commons: 'Of all the duties of Government, none matters more than keeping our country safe. 'It is an awesome task, and one to which we attach the utmost significance as this House and the public would expect. For people to flourish they must have confidence that they are safe as they go about their lives. 'For a society to excel, its values must be protected from harm and its laws upheld.' The minister later said: 'This Bill will protect the UK from people who pose a threat to our national security by preventing those who've been deprived of British citizenship and are overseas from returning until all appeals have been determined.' He added that where the Home Office is pursuing a person through the appeals process, the alleged extremist would be unable to renounce any other nationalities they might have until the Government runs out of road. Under existing laws, a person who wins an appeal could be released from immigration detention or returned to the UK while the Home Office considers further action. Mr Jarvis warned alleged extremists can renounce other nationalities and put 'themselves in a position whereby a deprivation order would render them stateless', limiting the UK Government's powers. He has received support from the Conservative frontbench, when Katie Lam said from the despatch box: 'Allowing potentially dangerous individuals to retain their citizenship while appeals are ongoing is absurd. 'This is not a power exercised lightly by any government, and the idea that dangerous people might escape accountability by exploiting procedure is frightening.' But Conservative former Home Office minister Kit Malthouse warned that the Bill appeared to 'breach a fundamental tenet', by turning the idea of 'innocent until proven guilty' on its head. Mr Malthouse said: 'If I'm accused of a crime and I am found innocent, and the prosecutors decide to appeal my conviction, I remain innocent – until that appeal is heard and decided against me. 'And if it's appealed beyond that, I remain innocent then still.' Turning to the wider deprivation of citizenship orders, which saw an average of 12 people a year lose their rights to a British passport on the grounds it was 'conducive to the public good' between 2018 and 2023, Mr Malthouse told MPs the system had 'created two classes of citizen in this country'. Shamima Begum, who travelled aged 15 from Bethnal Green, London, to territory held by the so-called Islamic State group a decade ago, is a well known example of the state's use of its powers. She was 'married off' to an IS fighter and was stripped of her British citizenship in February 2019. Mr Malthouse said he was a 'freeborn Englishman of two English parents going back I don't know how many years' with 'no claim on any other citizenship anywhere else'. He continued: 'It is my absolute, undeniable, unequivocal right to have citizenship in this country and it cannot be removed from me by any means whatsoever. 'That is not true of my children – I'm married to a Canadian citizen. They have a claim on Canadian citizenship. If the Home Secretary so decides, they can have their citizenship removed. 'That is true of every Jewish citizen of the United Kingdom who has a right to citizenship in Israel. There will be millions of British people of south Asian origin who feel that they have a second-class citizenship. 'This law only applies to certain of our citizens.' Bell Ribeiro-Addy said: 'I do not believe that citizenship is a privilege. I actually believe that it's a right.' The Labour MP for Clapham and Brixton Hill added: 'I want to understand why if somebody was such a huge threat to this country, we could not deal with them under other pieces of legislation.' She warned of a 'sense of nervousness amongst many communities when any legislation that touches and concerns citizenship is brought to this House', and said orders 'disproportionately' affect 'people of colour, or British-born or long-settled individuals whose heritage or ancestral links are outside of Europe'. Backing the Bill, Labour MP for Makerfield Josh Simons said that 'high streets full of vape shops, dog muck and smashed glass matter so much' as a 'visible and constant reminder that others seem not to feel they belong'. He described citizenship as 'belonging on a bigger scale – a larger us' and called for 'a modern citizenship regime – reform the ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights) and judicial review, establish digital ID or, for that matter, radically reform the British state'. Having backed the Bill at second reading, MPs will further scrutinise it in the Commons at a later date. The Bill does not change the reasons why a person could be deprived of their British status, nor their rights to an appeal.
