Freedom of Religion or Belief: UK Foreign Policy

13:30:00

I beg to move, That this House has considered the role of freedom of religion or belief in UK foreign policy. It is an absolute pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I am grateful to the Backbench Business Committee for granting the debate, and to all colleagues who have joined me to discuss this urgent, important and powerful subject. A great number of Members who have sponsored my debate are unable to attend because of pressing considerations, and I therefore give honourable mentions to my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee) and to the hon. Members for York Central (Rachael Maskell), for South Northamptonshire (Sarah Bool) and for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron), and the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith)—as well as to the many Members who have showed up. This is a cross-cutting and cross-party issue, and I hope the debate can go ahead in that spirit. Last week, I launched the Government’s new freedom of religion or belief—FORB—strategy at the Foreign Office. It is a bold strategy that is good for Britain, and I will talk more about it in a moment, but I want to start with my own experience of championing FORB, which started long before the Prime Minister asked me to be the UK special envoy last December. Growing up, my parents were involved in supporting Christian Mission to the Communist World. That included, as glasnost took root in the late 1980s, boarding ships that had docked in Scotland from the Soviet Union and the eastern bloc so that my parents could meet the sailors and share their faith. Those sailors had often never heard of Jesus Christ, or for that matter Mohammed, the Buddha or any other belief system except communism. Also, as a young boy, I met countless Christians who had been imprisoned, tortured and persecuted, especially those from behind the iron curtain, simply for what they believed. That made a huge impact on me—the fact that we can never take this freedom for granted in our world. Sadly, as we will hear today, we still cannot. The new Government strategy is for people like those Soviet sailors—people who are trapped and punished by systems that deny them the freedom to choose what they do or do not believe. That is why FORB is and should be at the very heart of UK foreign policy. It is about our values as a country, and the right to believe and practise one’s beliefs openly. It is something we can stand for in the world.

I thank the hon. Member for the brilliant job he is doing as our religious freedom envoy, which has support across the House. Does he agree that for all sorts of reasons, including political correctness and a worry about being seen to be glorifying our imperial history, our foreign policy has not done enough on freedom of religion and belief, but that countries that start to erode religious freedoms soon erode other freedoms as well, which is why it is vital that we redouble our efforts?

I thank the right hon. Member for that point, for his work as Foreign Secretary to bring about the role that I now inhabit, and for his focus on freedom of religion or belief. I agree—I will come on to say more about this—that we should be humble yet bold about what we can offer with our values and should not shy away from these issues because of perceived political correctness or whatever it may be. It is easy to talk about principles such as freedom, human rights, respect, tolerance or justice, but it is far harder to live up to their meaning in our actions. The history of this country, however, is one in which we have worked hard to create a plural society based on those values. We do not always get it right, but I am proud that in the UK today, we are free to practise our religion or belief without fear of persecution. My constituency of North Northumberland is home to worshipping communities that stretch back to Saxon times. My constituents have precious freedoms—too precious not to share. That is what the strategy is about. The world needs FORB, and Britain is uniquely placed to champion it. Championing FORB will be good for Britain too. Let me talk about the need and situation in the world at the moment. Most Members are well aware of the challenges we face, but some facts bear repeating. According to the Pew Research Centre, the number of countries with high or very high levels of Government restrictions on FORB is at its highest level since 2007. At the community level, social hostilities involving religion are also on the rise, further reducing respect for human rights in general and FORB in particular. For example, according to the charity Open Doors, 380 million Christians are persecuted worldwide because of their faith. Persecution on the basis of religion or belief, whether by states or social groups, is taking place on every continent in the world. It involves social ostracism, police harassment, arbitrary detention, denial of citizenship, assault, destruction of sites of religious worship, torture and killings. In Pakistan, Ahmadiyya Muslims are not recognised as Muslims by the state, and their mosques have repeatedly been desecrated by extremist groups. In Iran, the Baha’i are acutely vulnerable to scapegoating, incitement and threats of violence from state authorities. In North Korea, those seeking to exercise their right to freedom of religion or belief face surveillance and arbitrary detention, with Christians and others treated as political criminals if their faith is discovered. Those are not niche issues. FORB is central to the problems of the world today. Horrific acts, such as the murder of worshippers in a church in Damascus last month, are not only attacks on people for what they believe in, but attempts to destabilise societies and spread division. FORB demonstrates the core principle that human rights are interdependent and mutually reinforcing. Those who have no freedom to worship have no freedom of assembly. Those who have no freedom of belief have no freedom of conscience. Those who have no freedom to share their faith have no freedom of speech. Those who have no freedom to practice their faith or belief are not equal in dignity and rights. Those sound like obvious principles, but we must humbly remember that our own country took many centuries to discern them. For many long, sometimes shameful, periods of our own history we were better known as religious persecutors ourselves, oppressing those who did not believe in whichever strand of Christianity was ascendant at the time. We approach the rest of the world as a country that has erred and learned and that wants other nations to avoid our own mistakes. Countries that respect FORB and where all constituent communities can flourish are more stable, more secure and more prosperous. So to the strategy. The Government have formally made a new commitment to the centrality of FORB in their foreign policy, and I am delighted to be a small part of that through my role as the envoy. FORB will play its own distinctive part in our foreign policy. There are two top-line aims of that approach. The first is simply to reduce the number of countries in which the right to FORB is significantly curtailed, and the second is to promote FORB internationally as essential to human flourishing. There are five strands to the strategy. The first is engagement with multilateral institutions and forums to maintain collective support for FORB around the world. I am very proud that the UK has a history of championing FORB within the international rules-based order—something that seems to be under attack a lot of the time at the moment—not least as an original supporter of the universal declaration of human rights in 1948 and of the international covenant on civil and political rights in 1966. We will continue to work with international partners to take country-specific action where appropriate, whether through the UN’s universal periodic review process or by promoting FORB in multilateral resolutions. That strand underpinned, for example, my visit to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva just two weeks ago to give the UK Government statement on the right of Tibetan Buddhists, and not the Chinese Communist party, to determine the succession of the Dalai Lama. The second strand of our approach is bilateral engagement with countries where we feel we can make a difference.

I thank the hon. Member for the brilliant, nuanced speech that he is making about our role and its importance. Does he agree with me and with Amnesty International that there are more than 1 million Muslim Uyghurs in prison camps in the Xinjiang region of China, and that we can work effectively by ensuring that products made in that region, for example cotton, do not find their way on to the high streets in this country?

In my six months in this role as envoy, a repeated refrain has been that we must not forget the Uyghur Muslims of Xinjiang. I was very pleased to take part in an all-party parliamentary group meeting with human rights champions from Xinjiang in the last few weeks. The hon. Member is right: we must ensure that our procurement as a country and our approach to international economics and business does not in any way buttress the oppression of the many Uyghurs in China. The second point of the strategy is to build bilateral relationships, and I will say more on a moment on the countries I will focus on. The third strand is international coalitions of collective action, so that we can work together with the coalition of the willing. There are some countries that are more engaged in freedom of religion or belief than others, and we want to work with those who are passionate about this issue. We are proud to be, for example, members of the Article 18 Alliance and the International Contact Group on Freedom of Religion or Belief, and we will continue to double down on those relationships. The fourth of the five strands is about weaving support for FORB throughout the Government’s human rights agenda and foreign policy, because FORB is an acid test for the health of other human rights. That means bolstering our efforts to increase awareness and understanding of FORB within the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and across Government, as well as ensuring that tools, training and research are available to staff. I will report annually on that work, including at the highest levels of Government. Finally, the fifth strand is about working with civil society and religious groups because, frankly, a lot of the time they know what is happening on the ground even better than our posts and diplomatic missions around the world do. We need to try and draw them in and rely on what they are telling us. From sharing information to fostering understanding and respect between different religious or belief communities on the ground, civil society and religious group engagement is central to the protection and promotion of FORB. We will focus our bilateral engagement on 10 specific countries, chosen for their historical or geographical links that place the United Kingdom in a special position of influence; because we believe that there is a potential to make a difference now; and because of their place on the Pew Research Centre index, in terms of high levels of FORB persecution. Those countries are, in alphabetical order, Afghanistan, Algeria, China, India, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan, Syria, Ukraine and Vietnam. This is an ambitious strategy. It places a high level of confidence in our country’s ability to seek justice around the world. It requires buy-in from Government, from parliamentarians, from civil society and from religious groups. It will need resource allocation and, more importantly, it will need support. It will need this place to champion it at a time when sometimes voters are increasingly concerned with problems closer to home. It will require Government to own, centre and adequately resource it, and to know that the cost of failure is high. This strategy could lead not just to freedom for millions around the world, but to a flourishing here in the UK. I believe that strong support for freedom of religion or belief around the world could be both a blessing to the world and a blessing to the United Kingdom. We use quite dry words such as “strategy”, but in the end I think this is about a blessing. I remember, in a previous life, marching years ago on the G8 at Gleneagles for international debt relief; it seemed an impossible dream at the time, but we got it. I remember working in my first job, which was on peace and reconciliation in Northern Ireland, and wondering whether the Good Friday/Belfast agreement would hold, but it held. I remember working more recently, housing homeless people who had spent years on the street, and wondering whether they could rebuild their lives, but they did. Britain has a remarkable capacity to deliver good things. We have the wealth, the expertise and cultural generosity to turn bad into good, both locally and internationally. In other countries, that does not always happen. There are not many places where social conflict turns into lasting peace. It would be a thankless waste of centuries of history and democracy to turn away from those abroad who desperately need us. In the contemporary climate, the temptation is to raise the drawbridge and focus our efforts only at home but, if we direct some of our generosity outwards, we will store up blessings not only in other countries, but for ourselves. There is something profoundly life-giving about sharing what we have with others. We need think only about Bosnia, Kosovo and Sierra Leone to recall some of the positive impact that this country has made in the past 20 years. Promoting FORB revitalises our national story, challenges our darker impulses and creates a future to work towards. That is the role of FORB in Britain’s foreign policy—not as a policy, but as a blessing for those who need and deserve freedom. The persecuted need us. We can help them, and in doing so we will positively shape Britain and the world’s future for generations to come.

I remind Members that they need to bob if they wish to make a speech. When making speeches and interventions, Members should be aware that I will start the wind-ups at 2.28 pm. I call the Father of the House.

13:46:00

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris. I thank the special envoy for freedom of religion or belief, the hon. Member for North Northumberland (David Smith), for securing this important debate and for all his work. The Prime Minister obviously made an excellent choice. Freedom of religion or belief should be the cornerstone of the United Kingdom’s foreign policy to ensure the rights of minorities around the world, in compliance with our obligations under the United Nations declaration of human rights. As has been said, nations with high levels of religious liberty and tolerance are more stable than those that oppress people who wish only to worship in peace. I wish to focus on an issue that I raised a few weeks ago in the main Chamber at Church Commissioners questions: the plight of the Christians in Taybeh in the west bank and the violence from extremist settlers who are seeking to remove them from their land. I dedicate my speech to Mike Huckabee, Mr Trump’s choice as the United States ambassador to Israel, who is an evangelical pastor. He is also a strong supporter of these extremist settlers. The vast majority of our friends in Israel—the peaceful citizens of Israel—are totally opposed to the actions of these extremist settlers in the west bank. Taybeh is an ancient village in the Holy Land, in the occupied west bank. In biblical times, it was known as Ephraim, which according to John’s gospel is the village where Christ went before his passion. It is now the last and only Christian-majority town in the west bank. It is under attack as we speak. Cardinal Pizzaballa, who is the Latin patriarch of Jerusalem, the Greek Orthodox patriarch and other heads of churches in Jerusalem visited Taybeh on Monday following the recent violence. I place on record my thanks to the British consul general in Jerusalem, who accompanied the clergy on their mission to highlight to the world the plight of Taybeh. In the ruins of the church of St George, the assembled clergy issued a statement, saying that “radical Israelis from nearby settlements intentionally set fire near the town’s cemetery and the Church of Saint George”— intentionally set fire to a church— “which dates back to the 5th century. Taybeh is the last remaining all-Christian town in the West Bank. These actions are a direct and intentional threat to our local community first and foremost, but also to the historic and religious heritage of our ancestors and holy sites.” Taybeh’s Roman Catholic parish priest, Father Bashar Fawadleh, told the Catholic charity Aid to the Church in Need that following the latest violence the Israeli authorities were called twice for assistance, but no one came. With others, I went to the west bank this year, and we saw that extremist settlers are acting with impunity and not being reined in or called in by Israeli authorities. As I say, the attackers were able to behave with impunity. Father Bashar’s concerns were shared by the leaders of the churches, who called for greater accountability as they said: “Even in times of war, sacred places must be protected. We call for an immediate and transparent investigation into why the Israeli police did not respond to emergency calls from the local community and why these abhorrent actions continue to go unpunished.” As well as the violence that erupted, the intolerable situation is made all the worse by settlements continuing to encroach on Taybeh’s land, with illegal grazing and land seizures affecting the livelihood of the local Christians. These extremist settlers have attacked homes, started fires and even created a billboard outside Taybeh that, translated into English, said, “There is no future for you here”. These are people who are only trying to live in peace. They have lived there for 2,000 years, yet they are told, “There is no future for you here”. It is absolutely outrageous and the whole world should be calling it out. Father Bashar said that illegal cattle grazing in the olive groves risked the harvest’s failing, creating poverty among the Christian community. The heads of churches in Jerusalem are clear: “The attacks by the hands of settlers against our community, which is living in peace, must stop, both here in Taybeh and elsewhere throughout the West Bank. This is clearly part of the systematic attacks against Christians that we see unfolding throughout the region.” There are of course similar acts of intimidation and violence against our Muslim brothers in town after town in the west bank. It is absolutely intolerable. As part of the UK’s diplomatic efforts, we must be willing to be firm with our friends and allies when they are behaving contrary to international law. Christians have been present in the Holy Land since the passion of our Lord, and they have the right to live in peace in the west bank. It is imperative that the UK Government make it clear to the Israeli authorities that this intimidation and violence must end. I would be grateful if the Minister could write to me about what discussions the UK Government have had with the Israeli authorities on this issue, and what steps are being taken to stress the need to protect all religious communities in the west bank. The situation in Gaza is even more dire. Father Gabriel Romanelli is looking after 500 Christians gathered in and around the Holy Family church in Gaza City. Food is being rationed and other supplies are scarce. Death has become routine. There was an 11-week period when all outside aid was halted completely by the Israel Defence Forces. Aid has reached the Christians in Gaza only intermittently through the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem and Aid to the Church in Need. Much of the Gaza strip has been flattened. On Tuesday, I hosted the Channel 4 film on the suffering of medics in Gaza. What is going on in Gaza is absolutely appalling—it is the greatest humanitarian disaster and catastrophe in the world today. Israel seems to have no plan for the future that it is willing to reveal to anybody. No one disagrees that Hamas is an evil organisation that must be destroyed completely, but clearly innocent people are being made victims as well. It is the innocence of the victims of the atrocities committed by Hamas on 7 October 2023 that is so appalling. Why compound those atrocities by committing more in revenge? I hope that all people in the middle east can at last live in peace and prosperity.

13:53:00

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) for securing this important debate. Religious persecution is not confined to any one group, belief or country. It is a global issue that threatens the fundamental right to freedom—the right to believe or not to believe as we choose, free from violence and repression. I am lucky to represent Morecambe and Lunesdale, which is home to over 40 churches that stretch across our towns and villages from the north-east in Sedbergh right down to Heysham. Although I do not have any faith, I often find myself in churches talking to my constituents. Through countless conversations, I know that my constituents want people across the world to hold the same freedom that they do: to practise religion or to follow no faith at all; to believe as they choose; and to live without fear because of it. In one of those conversations, my constituent, a member of the Heysham Free Methodist church, brought to my attention the persecution of Christians in India, a topic that I have discussed in this Chamber before. I want to look at the bigger picture and what happens when the state holds up one religion over another or turns a blind eye to faith or belief-based persecution. As a humanist, I am only too aware of the horrors of persecution based on faith or lack of faith, a threat that is made worse when it is state-sanctioned or state-permitted. Persecution on the grounds of faith or belief is not isolated; it is systemic, systematic and global. Government restrictions on freedom of religion or belief are now at their highest level since 2007. From the Baha’i in Iran to the Uyghurs in China, people across the world are not free to express their closely held beliefs or to practise their faith or lack of faith freely. Those systems of persecution exist on a scale. It is not the case that people are either totally free or not free at all—it is not binary. Blasphemy laws exist in 91 nations on this earth, including in Northern Ireland, and they affect 57% of the global population. In 12 countries, a person can still be given the death penalty for blasphemy, and in 60 others, they could end up in prison. State enforcement of religious beliefs, whether explicit or de facto, is an affront to human rights and our democratic ideals. If we are not free to believe or not believe, we are not equal in dignity and rights. Human rights laws are there to protect people from discrimination, violence and harm, but they protect people, not ideas. Freedom of thought includes the right to question, to doubt and to disagree without the threat of punishment. State-enforced or state-backed religion suffocates freedom of expression or belief, and religious freedom is not just for the religious. Freedom of belief is the bedrock of any free society. I want to call particular attention to the persecution of those who hold no faith, a reality that often, unfortunately, goes unrecognised. In 2022, the president of the Humanist Association of Nigeria, Mubarak Bala, was sentenced to 24 years in prison for a Facebook post that was deemed to be blasphemous. He was recently released after an extensive appeal and campaign, having served two years in detention, where he was denied legal counsel, medical care and contact with his family. I am very pleased to say that Mubarak is now safe in Germany, and I had the honour of meeting him earlier this year when he joined us remotely at the all-party parliamentary humanist group, which I chair.

I am not sure whether the hon. Lady knows this—she probably does—but the deputation to Nigeria went through the APPG for international freedom of religion or belief. We approached the Minister responsible and put forward a case for the release of Mubarak Bala, and I believe that we can take some credit for that intervention, along with many others, to ensure that his freedom was assured.

I thank the hon. Gentleman and all the other people involved; I believe that was part of Mubarak’s release and I am very grateful for it, as I am sure are Mubarak and his family. His story reminds us that non-religious belief can be just as dangerous as religious belief in the eyes of a repressive state. I want to pay special thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland for his work as the UK’s special envoy for freedom of religion or belief. The framework he introduced earlier this month sets out a really clear vision for the UK’s global leadership on this issue. It rightly focuses diplomatic efforts on 10 priority countries and on work through international bodies to build the long-term partnerships we need to drive change. As a Labour Government, we champion human rights, including freedom of religion or belief, not only because it is in our national interest to support an international rules-based order, but because it is simply the right thing to do. Those are not abstract ideals; they are the foundations of this Government’s mission and of any free society. The evidence backs that approach. Countries that protect the rule of law and fundamental freedoms tend to be more stable, prosperous and resilient. When we share and support those values abroad, we help to build stronger international partners, and that contributes to the UK’s security, growth and development. We know that achieving that will be complex, and the plan recognises that we must work with other Governments, civil society and multilateral institutions to find common ground and deliver real change. Producing real, on-the-ground change takes flexibility. In some cases, progress will come from bold commitments and public statements. In others, it will come through private discussions and quiet diplomacy. This is an approach guided by partnership and shared learning, working towards the shared goal of securing freedom of belief for everyone, everywhere.

13:59:00

It is a pleasure to speak in this debate. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) for the role that he has taken on and the work ahead of him, which he has set out. The whole Chamber and the whole of Parliament will agree that the tone and manner with which he is approaching this complicated and difficult work will serve him and our country very well. As I suspect he would be happy to acknowledge, he is building on the legacy of his predecessor Fiona Bruce, the former Member for Congleton, who did so much to fill the role and build credibility for the United Kingdom across the globe. The envoy is at the centre of a web of relationships with great people in this country who do so much to champion the input and the enthusiasms of our constituents across the United Kingdom and motivate us as MPs to raise these matters in the House of Commons. One of them is Merv Thomas, the president and founder of Christian Solidarity Worldwide, who said to me recently that he is always being told that religion is the cause of so many problems in the world. He said, “Well, I look at it this way: freedom of religious belief is perhaps one of the solutions.” That gets to the heart of what the role is about. I am grateful to the envoy for setting out how his work will fit with the different elements of the Government’s foreign policy. That is critical. When we talk about matters such as national security and stability, trade and economic partnerships, the leadership role that we seek, the alliance building and the soft power that comes from being present in conversations about preventing humanitarian crises, we need to recognise that we gain a lot more credibility if we can be collaborative but principled and persistent in our willingness to engage on all those matters and able to have difficult conversations with countries with which we have relationships across those realms. It is not a binary question; it is not that we cannot talk about what is happening with the Uyghur Muslims in China while recognising that China is an important economic actor in the world that needs to be respected. We need to find ways of interacting well together and respecting, as far as we can, what common ground exists. It troubles me sometimes that when we have statements in the House, we revert to a binary: “It’s all good or it’s all the opposite.” The hon. Member for North Northumberland grasps the right way to approach this. Having said that, I want to put on the record some challenges that exist in a number of countries and some of the awful circumstances that people of minority religions in those countries endure. In North Korea, authorities are likely to round up the extended family of Christians and punish them, even if the family members themselves are not Christian. That is what Christians endure. Let us remind ourselves that according to Open Doors, another excellent organisation, there are 400,000 Christians in that country. It is very sensible that the envoy has set out a priority list of 10 countries, because we want to be able to measure progress, make an impact and influence those relationships. In Pakistan, blasphemy is punishable by death. If Christians are subject to accusations of blasphemy, it can result in torture or death at the hands of violent mobs. Christian and Hindu girls remain particularly vulnerable to forced religious conversion, abduction, trafficking, child, early and forced marriage, domestic servitude and sexual violence. It is important that the envoy is able to work with his colleagues and Ministers in the Foreign Office, even if it is awkward or inconvenient. Sometimes, perhaps, officials on a certain desk will say, “We don’t really need to be too explicit about the religious element.” We do. That religious element is fundamental to the oppression that is happening. Importantly, in his speech last week, the hon. Member said: “The fourth strand of our approach is…ensuring that FORB considerations are mainstreamed throughout the FCDO’s work and the need for a holistic human rights approach understood.” I totally recognise that there needs to be a holistic human rights approach, because of course not everyone has religious belief, but it is important not to lose clarity on the motivation behind some of the oppression that exists in some of these countries. Finally, as a country and in our national Parliament, we need to think through how we treat our Christian faith. We should be more open about how it motivates and influences us. The more transparent we are about it, the more reasoned and reasonable we can be in dealing with the implications for how we approach public policy. I lament the way it can be weaponised. It should not be. The hon. Member is very open about his Christian faith, as I am about mine. It was wonderful to see an envoy giving a speech, reading from a press release, but quoting from Proverbs 31. I wish him well in his role, I thank him for what he has set out today, and I urge him to be bold and courageous in all that he does.

14:06:00

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) for securing this debate and for his work on this important issue. I would like to share two personal reflections that shape the way I view religious freedom and its place in our foreign policy. The first reflection is on my lifelong faith. Between my mother’s deep Christian belief and spiritualism and my Church of England education, it seems I never stood much chance of avoiding belief altogether. Truth be told, I have never wanted to. I do not attend church nearly as often as I should, a failing I feel guilty about often, but I know without hesitation that when I need comfort or clarity, my faith—God, Jesus—is always there to support me. The second reflection is on my heritage. I am half-Icelandic on my mother’s side and was raised with an acute awareness of my Viking roots. Iceland is a small nation of under 400,000 people. Some families, mine included, can trace their lineage back for more than a millennium. One notable ancestor is Thorgeir of Lightwater, a pagan chieftain and lawspeaker who in the year 1000 was tasked with an impossibly difficult decision: which religion Iceland would adopt. He spent a day and a night under a fur blanket in silent reflection—something that I have found myself tempted to do after reading social media commentary—and when his deliberation ended he declared that Iceland would adopt Christianity. Remarkably, he also decreed that individuals could continue to worship privately however they chose. Although that fell short of what today we would call full religious liberty, it was extraordinarily liberal for its time, and it avoided a bloody civil war between pagan and Christian factions. Thorgeir’s story offers a sobering lesson: that belief is ultimately personal, that law cannot mandate conviction, and that practical compromise can safeguard peace. These are precisely the kinds of lesson that our foreign policy ought to embrace. Religious freedom is advanced when our diplomats, Ministers and civil servants understand the profound role that religion, religious practices and faith communities play in the societies we engage with abroad. In a UK political landscape that is largely secular, we must take care not to overlook the power of religion to drive development, mediate conflict and shape political identity.

Does the hon. Member agree that the UK’s credibility on promoting religious freedom abroad is significantly undermined by the deep cuts to official development assistance, which have reduced our ability to fund vital human rights and civil society work in fragile states where freedom of religion or belief is most at risk?

I do agree, and that is a difficult one for me as a Labour Member. All I can say is that I will hold my Government’s feet to the fire on ensuring that we return to levels of overseas development assistance, which I recognise is an important contribution that we make internationally. More than 80% of the world’s population affiliates with a religion. It is not, as some might cynically suggest, outdated or incompatible with democracy; it is a source of meaning, resilience and moral guidance to billions and, when understood and respected, a powerful partner in foreign policy. Faith-based organisations such as Christian Aid, World Vision, Muslim Aid and Tearfund play indispensable roles in delivering services, particularly to vulnerable communities. Those organisations are motivated by faith and supported by global communities who believe in their mission. Faith leaders have also played critical roles in human rights advocacy: from the South African Council of Churches opposing apartheid to Catholic resistance against dictatorship in Latin America and eastern Europe, their moral leadership has often been decisive in confronting injustice. While we advocate for religious freedom, we must also confront the painful realities of religious persecution across the world. Minorities are facing forced conversion, violence, economic marginalisation and, in extreme cases, genocide. We cannot afford to ignore that. Let us name the suffering: the Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar, Bahaʼi in Iran, Shia Muslims in Saudi Arabia, Ahmadis and Hazara in Pakistan, Muslims in India, Yazidis in Syria, Christians in China, faith groups across North Korea, the Palestinians. These are not isolated incidents; they are affronts to our shared humanity. If the UK is serious about advancing freedom of religious belief, we must integrate religious literacy into our diplomatic toolbox. We must build partnerships that respect faith identities, amplify marginalised voices and place human dignity at the core of our development, humanitarian and peacebuilding strategies. Let us reaffirm our role as global advocates for religious freedom, not just in principle, but in policy and practice. I add that I shall, of course, inform Hansard how to spell “Thorgeir”.

14:12:00

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I thank all hon. Members who have spoken, and I thank the hon. Member for Penrith and Solway (Markus Campbell-Savours) for his personal story. I thank the Labour party and the Prime Minister in particular for appointing the hon. Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) to his position as special envoy, a role that Fiona Bruce played when she was in Parliament. The hon. Member knows this, because I said it to him on the day he was appointed: I believe wholeheartedly that our God has placed him in that position for a purpose, just as he did with Fiona Bruce. I have some 74 churches in my constituency, of different denominations and with different religious affiliations. Every time we have a debate or a question in the Chamber on freedom of religion, I ensure that those 74 churches have a copy of Hansard to inform them, because they want to know what is happening. The same thing will happen after this debate. It is always an honour to rise in the House to speak not only about policy, but about principle. Today I rise to speak on a subject close to my heart and central to our shared humanity: the role of freedom of religion or belief in UK foreign policy. It is a real pleasure to see the Minister in her place—not just because she is a good Minister, but because she gives us the answers. I very much look forward to what she will do. Yesterday, in the urgent question in the Chamber on Sudan, she was there to give encouragement to the Christians in Sudan who have been persecuted, massacred and butchered. It is also a pleasure to see the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell), in his place; I look forward to his contribution too. The United Kingdom has long prided itself on being a champion of human rights. Yet at the heart of every proud tradition lies a truth we must never forget: freedom of religion or belief—FORB—is not a luxury; it is a foundational liberty. Therefore, it is core to our very beliefs, what we as a society should be trying to promote and what the Minister and the Government need to put in place. It is the right not just to worship freely, but to live without fear, coercion or discrimination on account of one’s faith or conscience. That right transcends borders, politics and creeds, and our foreign policy must reflect that. I welcome the stage that this is at and the direction that it is going. I believe that it can point us in the necessary direction. I declare an interest as the chair of the APPG for international freedom of religion or belief, through which I have had the opportunity on many occasions to see at first hand the consequences when that freedom is denied. I see Mervyn Thomas in the Public Gallery. Mervyn and I went to Egypt around 2012 or 2013. We had the chance to meet President el-Sisi, who promised us, as Mervyn will recall, the pluralistic society that we hoped would come about in Egypt. Obviously, we took him at his word—it was very impressive to meet the President in his palace—but we had the chance to go back there a short time ago, and that pluralistic society that President el-Sisi promised for Egypt is now taking place. In Cairo we had the opportunity to meet the bishop, as well as Father Abraham, Father Paul and Youssef Samir of the evangelical church, which is attended by 1,800 on a Sunday morning. When was the last time that anyone here was in a church with more than 200 people? I just pose that question. There are 600 children who attend that church in the middle of Cairo. It is a Muslim country, but it has a pluralistic society. Is that the work of President el-Sisi? Yes, partially, but it is also the work of God, and we have to recognise where that is all coming from. People have opportunities that they did not have before. They are building a new church. President el-Sisi, who is a Muslim, opened a mosque in Cairo; he asked, “When are you opening a Protestant church?” I say that we have lots of negative stories across the world, but we have to remember that God is working across the world, and his work is declaring positive news. From the persecution of Christians in Nigeria and Pakistan to the systematic repression of Uyghur Muslims in China, the silencing of Baha’i in Iran and the marginalisation of atheists and humanists across the globe, the landscape of belief is under threat. Where religious freedom is suppressed, other human rights quickly follow. That is why the United Kingdom must embed FORB as a guiding thread through its diplomatic and development work, not just in words but in practice. Through our embassies, aid and global partnerships, we have taken meaningful steps in the right direction. The establishment of the role of special envoy for freedom of religion or belief was a crucial milestone, and the special envoy is doing a tremendous job. I know that there is more to come. In 2022, the International Ministerial Conference on Freedom of Religion or Belief in London gathered leaders from all around the world to reaffirm their commitment to protecting this freedom. As new threats emerge, either through authoritarian surveillance, digital repression or the misuse of anti-conversion laws, our response must be firm, proactive and principled. We must ensure that FORB is not siloed as a niche concern, but integrated across every foreign policy conversation, from trade negotiations to peace- building, education and humanitarian relief. The Bible reminds us in Zechariah 7:9-10: “This is what the Lord Almighty said: ‘Administer true justice; show mercy and compassion to one another. Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the foreigner or the poor. Do not plot evil against each other.’” Every one of us in this place could learn a lot from that verse. That includes me, by the way; I am not excluding myself from that. All of us, including me, should consider that verse integral as we move forward. It calls us to protect freedom of religion and belief by standing up for the vulnerable and ensuring that justice and mercy guide our actions as a nation. Let us speak boldly for those whose voices are silent. Let us be that voice for the voiceless. Let us partner with Governments, taking real steps to protect the right to choose our own beliefs and challenge those Governments that oppose that. I believe we need to understand that freedom of religion or belief is not optional; it is a crucial part of building lasting peace. It should inform our relationship with those nations in terms of reputation and trade deals.

I recently led a delegation as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on the Kurdistan region in Iraq. We visited the Catholic archbishop of Erbil, Bashar Matti Warda, who told us about the safe haven that that region within Iraq offers for Christians and other religious communities. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the UK Government must do all that they can to strengthen places like that in difficult regions of the world as they try to foster freedom of religious belief and expression?

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. In the all-party parliamentary group for international freedom of religion or belief we had an opportunity to be in Iraq when Daesh was active. We were in Erbil and worshipped in the Roman Catholic Church at that time, because we felt it was important to stand alongside our brothers and sisters wherever they may be in the world. It is good to know that things have now progressed in a positive way and that Daesh is out. We hope to go back to Iraq sometime in the near future. Whenever things settle down in the middle east might be a better time to do that. I conclude with these comments for those with Christian faith, those with other faiths and those with no faith. In defending FORB we do not favour one faith over another. We defend the dignity of every individual—Muslim, Christian, Jew, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, atheist or otherwise —to believe, to change belief or to have no belief at all. Our foreign policy must not merely protect our interests, but must reflect our identity. That identity is rooted in liberty, justice and the unshakeable conviction that every person is created equal and worthy of respect. Let us stand firm in that conviction for the sake of those who suffer, and for the sake of the world we seek to build.

14:21:00

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) for securing this debate. I was with him the day that his appointment was announced. It was after many weeks of us all wondering whether Downing Street would appoint an envoy. He kept it quiet until it was announced, but I was so pleased that it was my friend who was given that responsibility, because I cannot think of anybody better to take on that role. I thank everyone who has spoken today. Every speech has moved me in some way. It is a testament to the way that freedom of religion or belief goes to the heart of our British values that we sit in cross-party consensus on this. And it is a testament to our nation that we can have this level of civility in our debate. I can look across to Opposition Members and see people I hold in high regard, notwithstanding our different views on various aspects of policy. I join the right hon. Member for Salisbury (John Glen) in his tribute to Fiona Bruce in the role that she played. I had the privilege of working with Fiona when she organised the FORB ministerial conference in 2022. The fact that I was a Labour candidate at the time and she a Conservative MP never came into it, because we were both absolutely unified in a sense of purpose. I had the blessing of being able to work briefly for about a year and a half on freedom of religion or belief. My background is in conflict prevention and human rights. Despite a decade in that space, when a friend asked me whether I would be willing to come and support Government relations around FORB, I thought I was being asked to work for a US business magazine because I had not actually heard that phrase before, which shows that we have some work to do. But I soon came to grips with the brief and came to develop a deep appreciation of the importance of freedom of religion or belief within human rights work and the work that we do around the world to prevent identity-based violence. As I entered this new world, however, I did so with a critical eye. I will just mention a few things that I have noted as a call to all of us who care about FORB. One is that we need to look outwards and not inwards. We need to avoid a competition over which group is the most persecuted, and instead recognise that establishing the universal principles of FORB is the best way to secure freedoms and rights for everybody. Secondly, FORB does not give a right to impose one’s religion or beliefs on others. My hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Lizzi Collinge) spoke so well about the importance of combating anti-blasphemy laws and the crucial right to be able to not believe in a deity. Thirdly, those of us who do come from a background of faith need also to recognise that the price of the freedom to practise our religion is to do no harm and to take responsibility. I think we need to do more sometimes to reach out to the LGBT community and others who have been historically marginalised and excluded, and that includes internationally. In Uganda, near where I used to work, a community is suffering intense persecution. It is in the name, sadly, of the God I worship that that persecution is being meted out. People from Afghanistan regularly reach out to me and tell me that they are living in a state of hiding akin to Anne Frank and her family, for fear of being exposed. We need to emphasise the belief aspect of freedom of religion or belief, which includes humanism—the right not to believe. The right to share one’s faith must also entail the right to criticise that faith. I am a Latter-day Saint. I see that “The Book of Mormon” musical is on in the west end all the time. I am comfortable with that. I absolutely defend the right for people to criticise me or my faith, but there is a difference between criticising theological beliefs and stereotyping, or ascribing negative traits without evidence to the holders of those beliefs. Likewise, there is a difference between mocking a religion in its abstract or organised form and discriminating against an individual who identifies with it. I want to speak to the strategy for a moment. This is a small point, but I think it is a really consequential one. We tend to think about our commitment to freedom of religion or belief in terms of negative rights—of protecting people against interference and infringements of their freedoms of conscience, speech or assembly—but I would suggest that for the UK truly to lead the world with our values, we need to assume our positive duty to enable those who are marginalised and persecuted to live in accordance with their faith and belief. We recognise that in our humanitarian response to war and disaster. We recognise the need for food, water, medicine and shelter, but could we also recognise the need for dignity, and the emotional and psychological need to live one’s faith? Could we not only allow people to live their religions, but actively assist them to do so? I have seen great examples of that around the world, from the Muslim and Christian youth in the Central African Republic who work together to rebuild each other’s mosques and churches, to the AMAR Foundation in Iraq helping Yazidi refugees, particularly women and girls, find healing and empowerment through traditional religious clothing that they had to leave behind in their flight from ISIS.

Apologies—I have almost finished. Members of my own church, the Latter-day Saints here in London, give out copies of the Quran to refugees. As we do this, let Britain continue to be a beacon for religious freedom around the world in an active sense.

14:28:00

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I thank the hon. Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) for securing this important debate on the role of freedom of religion or belief in UK foreign policy, and for his work as special envoy. The ability to express one’s political and religious affiliations freely is a fundamental human right that must be preserved. That principle is enshrined in article 18 of the universal declaration of human rights, and must remain central to UK foreign policy. The Liberal Democrats have long believed that human rights, democracy and the rule of law are not just aspirational values, but the foundation of a just and peaceful world. I am proud of our long-standing commitment to defending freedom of religion or belief, and I am deeply concerned by the growing threat to those rights internationally. Religious minorities across the globe continue to face harassment, discrimination and persecution. In 2021, the Pew Research Centre found that Christians faced Government or societal harassment in 160 countries, with Muslims facing it in 141 and Jews in 91. We should reflect on what those numbers mean: in those countries, people live in fear, and face violence or even imprisonment simply for their beliefs. Unfortunately, the situation is either deteriorating or stagnating in many such countries.

Earlier this week, I spoke to Aid to the Church in Need, particularly about the situation for Christians in Syria. Hon. Members are obviously well aware of the recent suicide bombing of the St Elias Orthodox church in Damascus, and Christian communities are still facing persecution, including with destructive fires. Does the hon. Member agree that the situation is grave in many parts of the world, including Syria?

Absolutely. The situation is very grave in many parts of the world. In fact, it is more than grave—it is intolerable. In our foreign policy, the UK must proactively seek to champion freedom of belief and religion. The hon. Member for North Northumberland, the special envoy, has identified 10 priority countries where freedom of religion or belief is under particular strain; I am concerned that diplomatic pressure in those countries remains inconsistent and at times ineffective. Where religious legislation remains stagnant or regressive, I see little evidence that UK engagement has shifted the dial. I urge the Government to take a far more active and co-ordinated approach, not just to maintain relationships but to use them to drive real progress on rights and freedoms. It is not enough to make declarations; the Government must match words with action. That means ensuring that the special envoy for freedom of religion or belief—I understand why he uses the acronym FORB; it is much easier to say—is properly resourced, has a clear mandate and is empowered to influence policy across the FCDO. I also urge the Government to appoint an ambassador-level champion for freedom of religion or belief, with cross-departmental reach and the responsibility to ensure that religious freedom is not an afterthought in UK foreign policy, but a guiding principle. The UK’s approach must also recognise the intersections between religious persecution and other forms of oppression. Minority faith women and girls face heightened risks, including forced marriage, exclusion from education, and sexual violence. Their gender adds a further layer of marginalisation, and it is essential that UK policy reflects that reality. We must also be alive to the modern tools of repression. In China, surveillance technology and biometric data are being used to monitor and intimidate religious groups. Technological repression is becoming increasingly sophisticated and the UK must be ready to challenge those abuses at the international level. To have the biggest impact, the UK must work through international bodies, including the United Nations and the Commonwealth, to press for reform, support democratic movements and uphold the right of all people to live with or without faith. Persecution based on religion or belief should have no place in today’s world. It is a bellwether for broader freedoms: where it is restricted, restrictions on other rights soon follow. We will continue to push for a foreign policy that defends the rights of all people, everywhere, to live without fear and in accordance with their consciences. The UK must not be a bystander. We must lead with conviction, courage, and a clear commitment to human rights at the heart of our foreign policy. I ask the Minister what concrete steps the Government will take this year to challenge countries where religious repression is entrenched, and to ensure that our foreign policy truly upholds the values we claim to defend.

14:33:00

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris, not least as you have another role as trade envoy to New Zealand. I was very pleased to visit Christchurch, New Zealand, some years ago to see its magnificent cathedral. I then went again a few years later and saw that it had been destroyed. I pay tribute to our New Zealander friends because theirs is a Christian country, they uphold Christian values and they are part of our Commonwealth family. Many New Zealand MP friends of mine would be fascinated by, and very supportive of, this wonderful and important debate. I commend the hon. Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) for securing it and, more importantly, for continuing the work of our friend and former colleague Fiona Bruce, who was Member of Parliament for Congleton until last year. We can all agree that the hon. Gentleman is doing a splendid job as the special envoy on freedom of religion or belief, upholding the values shared by Members on both sides of the House. I thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Salisbury (John Glen) and the hon. Member for Bishop Auckland (Sam Rushworth) for paying tribute to Fiona; she is a lovely person and we miss her. But we are delighted that the work she started is being continued by the hon. Member for North Northumberland. The British nation has always stood resolutely for liberty, not just here at home but around the world. We are one of the few nations that have appointed a special envoy of this nature, and that is no small thing. But with that leadership comes immense responsibility. When millions across the globe face violence, imprisonment and discrimination simply because of what they believe, we cannot look the other way or pass by on the other side. We have a moral obligation to defend the fundamental freedoms that have shaped our history in these islands and defined our values. We must never retreat from upholding what is right. Indeed, it is precisely because we always stand firm in defence of such principles that the United Kingdom commands such deep respect around the world. Liberty generally, and freedom of religion or belief more broadly, must be at the heart of our foreign policy. I commend all Members who spoke in this debate. I pay particular reference to my right hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh) for highlighting the issue of what is happening in Taybeh, and how horrific the actions taken there are. It is very upsetting to hear, and I hope that our friends in Israel will be listening to this debate. As someone who is, and has always been, pro-Israel, I am very upset to hear what is going on. My heart goes out to the members of St George’s church, the Christian community and all those being persecuted or losing their lives in that dreadful conflict. At the start of his speech, the hon. Member for North Northumberland spoke about visiting the Soviet Union and seeing the persecution there. I remember that during my days in the Young Conservatives we supported freedom of religion in the Soviet Union; Bibles were being smuggled over there—a lot of work was going on in those days. Earlier this year, I visited Shkodër, in the north of Albania. I visited a prison where the most appalling torture had taken place under the vile Albanian communist regime. We all agree that the world must move on from those atrocities and not go back. Sadly, there are parts of the world where these things continue. We must stand together, unified against such things. I commend my right hon. Friend the Member for Salisbury for making a clear statement: he said that we should be bold and courageous in proclaiming our Christian faith. And so we should. The entirety of the foundations, traditions, customs and heritage of our country are based on the Christian faith. The cross is on the top of the crown—when the King wears the crown, there is a cross on the top. That means that all religions and denominations are equal, but there has to be an understanding that there is a Christian foundation to our society. I say to the hon. Member for Penrith and Solway (Markus Campbell-Savours) that I was honoured to travel to Iceland a few years ago with Lord Campbell-Savours, the hon. Member’s father. We had many discussions about all kinds of things. The hon. Member has a wonderful father, who serves in the other place, and I am delighted to see that he is continuing his father’s work and talking about Iceland, a country with which we have a huge amount in common. There are many dear friends in that country. I also thank the hon. Members for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Lizzi Collinge) and for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for speaking in this significant debate. We learned last week, and this has been articulated this afternoon, that the FCDO has now announced a five-point strategy on freedom of religion or belief. That is a welcome step, but as ever it is not about the plan—it is about delivery. What matters now is whether this Government are matching the words with actions. The first point that has been articulated is that of upholding international standards. The UK has long had influence in international forums, as a member of the UN Security Council and given that our capital, London, is home to the Commonwealth Secretariat, but are we really using that influence to lead the charge on religious freedom to the full? Are we naming those who trample on religious rights? Are we truly standing up to regimes that ignore international law and persecute people of faith? Or are we hesitating when that might come at a diplomatic cost? Maybe the Minister can answer those questions later. Secondly, on bilateral engagement, Ministers regularly tell us that they raise these issues behind closed doors. When will we see the results? What outcomes have been achieved from our talks with long-standing members of the Commonwealth, such as, for instance, Pakistan, where blasphemy laws continue to be abused with devastating effect; or Nigeria, where only last year, 218 Christians were slaughtered by Islamic fundamentalists in the middle belt? Have we made clear to those Governments that this simply cannot go on and that there will be consequences if it does? And what about China? The persecution of Uyghur Muslims, Christians and Falun Gong practitioners has long been systematic, brutal and well-documented. Governments, past and present, talk of engagement, but what does that mean in practice? Given that His Majesty’s Government have gone back on their promise of a fully published China audit, will the Minister assure us all today that freedom of religion and belief will be front and centre in any negotiations with the Chinese Communist party? Or are we still willing to trade human rights for economic deals and the allure of a super-embassy on prime real estate in London? Is that really something we should be supporting? The third strand of the FCDO’s policy strategy is building coalitions. In principle, of course I support that, but coalitions must be seen to be achieving things. Who are our partners? What practical steps have we taken with allies to defend freedom of religion and belief in the toughest regions, such as the Sahel, the middle east or central America? Have we formed joint initiatives or are we merely issuing polite statements?

A constituent of mine, Nicola, has raised concerns highlighted by the Open Doors charity about the case of Mehran Shamloui. He is a Christian who fled Iran to avoid being imprisoned for his faith and has apparently been detained after being deported back to Iran, and charged with propaganda against Islamic law and membership of groups opposing the state. He now faces an uncertain future. Does the hon. Member agree with me that cases relating to that particular country and regime must be a focus of our Government?

Of course; I could not possibly disagree. Now that point is on the record, I am sure the Minister will take note and take that case forward. The fourth strand is about maintaining FORB across the FCDO. If done properly, that could be transformative. But, again, where is the detail? Are our ambassadors trained on FORB? Are they expected to report on it? Is religious freedom considered when we decide where aid goes or when arms are sold? Is FORB integrated in our dealings with Commonwealth partners, many of whom face significant challenges on these issues? Or is it still viewed as a specialist interest and a box simply to be ticked? The final point is civil society. Those brave individuals on the ground are often the first line of defence for religious freedom. They speak out when Governments will not. They face threats, harassment and even death. How are we supporting them? Are we funding grassroots organisations? Are we giving them access to our embassies and high commissions, our diplomats and our protection, or are they being left to fend for themselves? At the recent FCDO briefing on this subject, cases were presented regarding countries such as Nicaragua, Eritrea, Yemen and Afghanistan. The picture was bleak, with repressive laws, targeted killings and the crushing of dissent. This is seemingly part of a wider pattern. In Nicaragua, the Ortega regime is targeting the Catholic Church in a campaign of repression. In Eritrea, Christians are languishing in prison. In Yemen, religious minorities are caught between war and persecution. In Syria and Iraq, ancient communities have been decimated. What exactly is the UK doing in each of those places? Where are the consequences for those who commit these crimes? The Government recently announced the suspension of sanctions on the new Syrian Government. However, as recently as this week, we have witnessed the eruption of violence between the Druze minority and Islamists, with the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reporting dozens of deaths. In the light of those developments, was the suspension of sanctions on Syria premature? I think it was. If FORB is central to our foreign policy, was the suspension of sanctions on Syria an indication that religious freedom has been restored in Syria? Are we monitoring the dangers faced by religious and ethnic minorities such as the Druze, who have long sought to remain neutral in Syria’s civil conflict? The sad truth is that freedom of religion and belief is deteriorating and violations are increasing. Perpetrators are becoming more brazen and the people who are suffering, be they Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Yazidis, Jewish people, Baha’is or others, too often have nowhere to turn. If the Government are prepared to back fine words with firm action, let us see it now. Will they publish regular updates on how the five-point strategy is being delivered? Will they bring transparent, accountable and measurable goals into the work published? I believe that Britain has always stood for freedom. Let us not falter now. We have a voice through the previous Government’s creation of the special envoy position. We have the tools now; what we need is the resolve to use them. I urge the Minister to ensure that all our talk of freedom of religion and belief is not merely honeyed words, but a real statement of intent from His Majesty’s Government that we take this seriously and that those who violate the sacrosanct principles of religious freedom will suffer the consequences.

14:46:00

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship in this important debate, Mrs Harris. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) for securing this debate and for his dedicated work, both before he entered this place and now as the Prime Minister’s special envoy for freedom of religion or belief. The strong views shared across the House today show just how important this issue is to so many of us. I welcome the chance to respond to the points raised and to restate the Government’s commitment to defending freedom of religion or belief. That commitment was reinforced just last week with the launch of the UK’s approach to FORB, which puts this work at the very heart of our foreign policy. As my hon. Friend mentioned, we are taking a more targeted approach under the FORB strategy, focusing on 10 countries, but not to the exclusion of engagement on FORB issues across the world; we will remain responsive to other situations. As today’s debate demonstrates, this is truly a global challenge. Human rights, including the right to freedom of religion or belief, the rule of law and good governance, are the foundations of this Government’s mission. This is about not only doing what is right, but our national interest. We know that countries that uphold rights and the rule of law are more stable, prosperous and resilient. We also know that when freedom of religion or belief is under threat, the other rights are often at risk. That was poignantly demonstrated in the contributions from my hon. Friends the Members for Rugby (John Slinger) and for Bishop Auckland (Sam Rushworth), who talked about the LGBTQ community, which is sometimes oppressed by religious communities, and Yazidi refugees in connection with the element of respect and dignity in the strategy. I take on board the challenge around training—perhaps not for our staff, but for Members and Ministers. I often find that it is the Ministers who get trained by the officials, but I will make sure that there is training on both sides. I am sure that my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland will look at training needs across the network, in case there is anything we have missed. From the Uyghurs in China, who were mentioned by the hon. Member for Leicester South (Shockat Adam) and the right hon. Member for Salisbury (John Glen), and Ukrainians under Russian occupation to recent attacks on worshippers in Syria and the daily persecution of minority communities in Bangladesh, these are not isolated incidents. They are a call to action, and this Government will respond. That is why Lord Collins, the Minister for human rights, recently wrote to all heads of mission underlining the importance of embedding our human rights priorities, including freedom of religion or belief, across the network. As the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) mentioned, the strategy demands that we draw on the strength of our diplomatic network, so that freedom of religion or belief is genuinely embedded in the conversations that we are having anyway, working with human rights champions and grassroots networks, speaking up on the international stage, and of course landing our messages clearly in our bilateral engagements. In our bilateral work, often we speak out publicly, and more often we speak privately, and we will continue to do both. We do not shy away from challenging countries that fall short of their obligations, but we also know that real progress comes through partnership, finding common ground and working together to deliver change. To take a few examples, freedom of religion or belief is a central part of our work in Pakistan. The Under-Secretary of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), discussed this topic with Government Ministers and religious leaders during his visit in November. In Nigeria, the drivers of intercommunal violence are complex, but I was relieved to hear of the release of Mubarak Bala, whose case my hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Lizzi Collinge) raised. That was the result of a long-running campaign by Humanists International and the all-party parliamentary humanist group, which the Government were pleased to get behind. These campaigns are often so much more powerful when they do not come from Governments, but when Governments get behind them. In October, I personally pressed the Vietnamese Government to respect people’s rights to speak freely, to meet in groups and to practise their religion, just as they agreed to in their most recent United Nations human rights review. I followed up with Vice Foreign Minister Hang on 17 March, and I will keep working with the Vietnamese Government to make sure that these rights are protected. We are also in constant dialogue with the interim Government in Bangladesh, stressing the importance of upholding freedom of religion or belief and protecting all communities, even when they make up less than 5% of the population. My hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) spoke about Syria. We are deeply concerned about the recent violence in the south and welcome the announcement yesterday of a ceasefire. Perhaps the picture is changing. We have made it clear that the Government must ensure the protection of all civilians, including Druze, hold to account those responsible for violence and make progress towards an inclusive political transition. The Foreign Secretary visited earlier this month and underlined those priorities. Meanwhile, we continue to stand firm on human rights in China, raising our concerns at the highest level and as part of the audit the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) mentioned. I was able to meet with groups, including Rahima Mahmut from the Xinjiang group, as part of the audit, so the words of people in the Xinjiang region who have personally suffered bled into the China audit. The right hon. Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh) mentioned the awful situation in Taybeh in the west bank. His words echo those of the Bishop of Southwark, who has condemned the situation in Taybeh and the pure impunity following the attacks in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. We have also seen the Holy Family church in Gaza being struck. Earlier this week, our consul general visited Taybeh with church leaders and international partners to express solidarity with the local community following those awful attacks, which were so eloquently described by the Father of the House. We also reiterate our calls for the status quo arrangement at Jerusalem’s holy sites to be upheld, to ensure the safety and the security of Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount and all who worship there. At the multilateral level, we believe that real progress comes from working together. That is why we are using our international role alongside a wide range of countries to promote tolerance and respect. I am pleased that my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland joined the UK-led Human Rights Council side event on Tibetan Buddhism, leading the international community on this important question in Geneva. We need to listen to the testimonies of the Tibetan Buddhist community, so that our Government can show that we believe that choosing the Dalai Lama’s successor is a decision for Tibetan Buddhists alone. We regularly take part in interactive dialogues with the UN special rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief and other mandate holders. In June, we used the platform to call on the Taliban to reverse their inhumane restrictions on minorities, including the Hazara community, which of course particularly affect Hazara women. We also urged Eritrea to release people detained for political reasons or for their religion or belief. We often raise freedom of religion or belief concerns during the UN’s universal periodic review. In particular, we pressed the Iraqi Government—the hon. Members for Rugby and for Strangford spoke about—regarding the Kurdish and Christian communities, who are both under severe pressure in that part of the world.

I had the great privilege of visiting the holiest temple of the Yazidi people, Lalish, and was warmly welcomed by them. They have endured horrific atrocities at the hands of ISIS Daesh, including genocide and mass displacement. Does my hon. Friend agree that the work of the Kurdistan Regional Government and President Nechirvan Barzani—particularly through initiatives such as the office for rescuing the abducted, which has so far rescued 3,500 individuals—is to be commended? Can she see whether the Government can help in that endeavour?

I certainly will. My hon. Friend has now put that on record, so I am pleased that he was able to get that into this important debate. I am also pleased that we were able to lobby the Government of Laos to guarantee that everyone, including minorities, can exercise their rights without facing reprisals. We also work closely with the OSCE, which gives us a valuable platform to discuss freedom of religion or belief and related issues. We are an active member of the Article 18 Alliance, on which my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland went into in much detail. Over the past year, the UK has proudly held the presidency of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, and we led international efforts to promote Holocaust remembrance, tackle distortion, fight antisemitism, and ensure that future generations learn the lessons of the past. I can announce today that the programme funding is safe—the Lib Dem spokesperson, the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley), asked about that. The John Bunyan fund, which targets funding through our posts, is safe from any reductions. I am excited to see how that will be spent, in consultation with the envoy for freedom of religion or belief. On the question of the important case in Iran raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Rugby, I am sure that the Minister, Lord Collins, will respond to him in detail. I recognise the strength of feeling in this debate. It is a reminder of how deeply people care about the right to believe or not believe freely. That is why we are committed to working with others, and we will use every opportunity to stand up for freedom of religion or belief. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland will get me into big trouble if I do not.

I call David Smith to quickly wind up.

14:57:00

Thank you, Mrs Harris—I am mindful of the time. I thank all Members for the spirit of the debate. I mentioned earlier that this is a cross-party issue, and that was evident here today. I thank the right hon. Member for Godalming and Ash (Sir Jeremy Hunt) for his role in shaping this work. I also place on the record my thanks to Fiona Bruce, the former Member for Congleton, who created a great foundation for this work. I also thank Members for the breadth of the debate. I did not think we would get into 1,000-year-old Icelandic features, but that was fantastic and a great surprise. The key thing the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell), said was that this is an immense responsibility; I emphasise that it is an immense responsibility for all of us, whether across the world with all our partners or across this place. Once again, I thank everyone who has taken part in the debate and has stood—and will stand—for freedom of religion or belief. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the role of freedom of religion or belief in UK foreign policy.