The Lord Bishop of Southwark

My Lords, I endorse what the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, said about the vile harm of increasing antisemitism in our nation. I am glad that widespread condemnation is being matched by solidarity and community action. I also welcome what the Minister said about working for and recognising a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine, but ask that urgent attention be given to the threat posed by the E1 developments in the West Bank, which would imperil such a solution. We on these Benches have lamented the retreat from the commitment to 0.7% equivalent of GDP on development aid to 0.5% and then further to 0.3% under successive Governments, and the very real impact this has had around the world in the serious deterioration in health, education and nutrition, not to mention the significant diminution of our global reach. I welcome the Minister’s clarification of the Government’s intentions in what was said in the gracious Speech about taking action to reduce humanitarian need and conflict around the world. Many in this House will have read the report in the Times on Monday of 51 military veterans, including Field-Marshal Lord Richards—the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Richards—a former Chief of the Defence Staff, Major-General James Cowan, who commanded the British Army’s primary fighting division, and General Sir Nick Parker, former commander-in-chief of land forces, protesting this latest cut. They argue, with the considerable expertise and wisdom at their disposal, that to force a choice between development aid and defence spending, the increased need for which I do not doubt, is a false economy. To live in a world where state and non-state actors are more aggressive, where one of our principal allies is ever more unpredictable, where water resources are contested, where climate change drives food insecurity and where other states begin to fail is to live in a world that is increasingly more threatened with incipient and real conflict. To cut aid contributes to instability and insecurity. It means a vast erosion of this country’s soft power in a new era when, having exited a foundational political partnership, we increasingly find ourselves acting alone. The inescapable logic of Brexit is that we need to compensate by spending more on defence, more on aid, more on diplomatic representation and more on the BBC to maintain our influence in the world. What we are doing is planning to increase the first while cutting all the rest. Surely the lesson of history is that there is a complex interplay between power and influence. Neither should be neglected. I hope that His Majesty’s Government will think again.