It has been a very busy and complicated week in Parliament as MPs voted on the Lords amendments of the European Union Withdrawal Bill, with several hours of debate and dozens of votes. This is a hugely important matter to the country and I have received many emails and letters from constituents sharing their thoughts and asking my opinion, as Brexit will of course have a big impact on Durham. I wanted to provide an update on what happened in parliament and to explain to constituents how I voted.
Since Britain voted to leave the EU in 2016, I have been working with my Labour colleagues to campaign for the best Brexit package possible. However, I am very concerned by the growing divisions that have been created in our society by Brexit. This week I supported all of the Lords amendments and voted against the Government’s rejection of them, except amendment 51, which I abstained.
Labour believes that in order to protect jobs, the economy, rights and to prevent a hard border in Northern Ireland we need to negotiate a strong single market deal, and we do not think that the European Economic Area (EEA) is the best way to achieve this. The EEA does have several attributes, including ensuring a high level of participation in the single market, but it also has very significant drawbacks, for example, it means that the UK has little say over EU rules. This is why I abstained over the vote for this amendment.
I instead voted for Labour’s amendment, 51 a, which set out “to ensure the United Kingdom has full access to the internal market of the European Union, underpinned by shared institutions and regulations, with no new impediments to trade and common rights, standards and protections as a minimum.” This amendment underlines our determination to retain the benefits of the single market and build on commitments in our manifesto.
I share many concerns that not being part of a customs union could lead to a hard border in Northern Ireland. Negotiating a new comprehensive customs union with the EU is the best way to prevent this, and also to ensure there are no tariffs or customs checks with the EU, which will help support British manufacturing industry. I voted for in favour of the Lords amendments 1 and 2, and against the Government’s rejection of this.
I strongly agree believe that Parliament should be able vote on the final Brexit deal proposed by the Government. This is important to ensure that the process of Britain exiting from the European Union is carried out in a democratic way.
That is why, along with my Labour colleagues, I voted in favour of the Lords amendment 19, and I was very disappointed that the Government voted to disagree with the amendment. I understand that the Prime Minister made several concessions to some Conservative MPs just before the vote to convince them to vote this way. These concessions are yet to be made public and I hope that when we find out what they are, they will ensure that Parliament has a final say on the Brexit deal.
Please be assured that with my Labour colleagues, I will continue to challenge the Government on their failure thus far to bring forward a Brexit package that acts in the best interest of the UK, and will do my best to prevent Britain’s departure from the EU from negatively effecting my constituents. Following this week in Parliament, I look forward to further discussions with my Labour colleagues and organisations about how to deliver a Brexit deal that provides the best outcomes for Durham and the North East.
It has been a very busy and complicated week in Parliament as MPs voted on the Lords amendments of the European Union Withdrawal Bill, with several hours of debate and...
In March I had the opportunity to attend the 62nd Annual Session of the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) for five days at the UN headquarters in New York. The Commission is the UN’s largest annual gathering on gender equality and women’s rights, and I joined more than 4,300 representatives from 170 Member states and over 600 organisations.
I attended as a delegate of the British Group of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), a global organisation that brings national parliaments together to drive positive democratic change.
The theme of the CSW this year was to address the challenges and opportunities in achieving gender equality and the empowerment of rural women and girls.
The Commission hosted a number of seminars, forums and meetings which explored global issues under the umbrella theme of rural women and girls, such as how achieving gender equality is essential to each of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, sexism and how it can be prevented, and ending violence against women.
In between attending IPU side-events and NGO meetings my schedule allowed me to join many of the CSW forums and seminars through-out the week including:
- Under the Spotlight: Ending Violence Against all Women and Girls
- Addressing Sexism: Speaking Up, Preventing, and Co-operating
- Participation of Women in the politics in the Western Balkans
- The Role of Parliaments as Partners in Women, Peace and Security
- United Nations officer for project SEVICES: What Do You See? An Insight to Gender Mainstreaming in Infrastructure
- Afghanistan: Afghan Government Initiatives and Measures for the Improvement for Rural Women’s Situation
Two CSW sessions that particularly stood out were the “Ending Violence Against all Women and Girls” and “Addressing sexism: speaking up, preventing, and co-operating” discussions.
In the “Ending Violence Against all Women and Girls” session the question of intersectionality and reaching specific groups of women and girls was the central topic, and it was refreshing to see the panellists discuss the importance of identifying the barriers that prevent engagement with specific groups that face multiple forms of discrimination. The discussions highlighted how analysing these challenges will help to establish methods to end violence against marginalised women and girls.
The “Addressing Sexism: speaking up, preventing, and co-operating” panel featured Karen Ellemann, Minister for Equal Opportunities of Denmark, Charles Ramsden, Vice-Chairperson of the Council of Europe Gender Equality Commission, Purna Sen, the UN Women Policy Director and Emma Holten, activist and expert. The #MeToo movement and reports of pay inequality in high profile organisations such as the BBC have pushed sexism up on the political agenda once again, and the panellists debated the causes and different forms of sexism, in addition to the impacts of sexism and the measures needed to tackle it.
On my last day at the CSW I met with Purna Sen, Head of Policy at UN Women to discuss how the UK can act to support further the work of UN Women.
Tuesday at the CSW was designated as an IPU day, and as an IPU delegate this was the main purpose of my attendance. The IPU held a parliamentary meeting in cooperation with UN Women which I attended with over 140 fellow MPs from 42 participating countries. The parliamentary meeting was entitled “Parliaments deliver for rural women and girls”.
I attended all of the sessions of the day and each session looked at different ways to remove systemic barriers that prevent rural women and girls from overcoming inequality and discrimination.
Rural women and girls contribute significantly to agricultural production and food security. However, despite this they remain significantly worse off than rural and urban men, especially in terms of leadership and decision making, and access to justice and opportunities.
In the first session titled “Amplifying the voices of rural women and girls”, MPs explored and debated issues including what is needed to fulfil the promises of access to health for all women and girls and what prevents rural girls from being at school with focus placed on the role of parliamentarians in helping to solve these issues.
The second session “Addressing discrimination against rural women and girls”, examined how rural women and girls face multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination, injustices and violence, and how they disproportionately experience poverty and exclusion including lack of access to land ownership and natural resources. The session was attended by Charles Chauvel who serves with the United Nations Development Programme and I spoke about the importance of nutrition and food for rural women and girls, which as a member of the APPG on School Food is an issue close to my heart.
The third session explored how rural women and girls are closely connected to the environment and are disproportionately impacted by the effects of climate change. We discussed the best methods to hold governments, international institutions, donor and multinational companies accountable for the impact of climate change on rural communities, and the disproportionate impact on rural women and girls.
The outcome of the IPU sessions were very positive with MPs reaching several agreements to deliver for rural women and girls. Agreements included a commitment to laws that guarantee rights, justice and equality for rural women and girls, and to repeal discriminatory laws that impact negatively on their lives.
The following day, the IPU also held a series of side events, these were: “Making it safe for Women in Politics: Seeking institutional solutions”, Gender and youth quotas: Complementary or in competition?” and “Advancing gender equality in nationality laws”.
I attended the “Making it safe for Women in Politics” session which the IPU co-organized with UN Women and the Permanent Mission of Canada. The session focused on violence against women in politics, an on-going global issue demonstrated by the IPU’s research which found that 20% of women parliamentarians had experienced sexual harassment, 12.7% had experienced a threat of the use of physical violence against themselves, and 14.5% said they had been denied funds to which they were entitled during their terms in office. The forum was very popular and I was joined by 130 attendees.
In between attending CSW and IPU events I was also met with many NGOs and attended NGO hosted forums throughout the week. Each evening the UK delegations met with NGOs and representatives from the UK permanent mission to the UN to discuss the events and sessions of the day, and to plan ahead for the upcoming sessions.
Girls’ Education Challenge, a UK aid initiative, was also represented at the CSW and held a forum hosted by Penny Mordaunt, the Secretary of State for International Development. Launched in 2012, the Girls’ Education Challenge is the largest global fund dedicated to girls’ education and focuses on getting girls into school and learning.
I chaired several of the events hosted by the UK NGO CSW Alliance including the “Increasing Prosperity for Rural Women Implementing engendered SGGs targets in many goals”, and the “Young Women’s Roundtable”. The “Young Women’s Roundtable” event brought together young women and parliamentarians, including fellow British MPs Jess Phillips and Maria Miller who are both members of the Women and Equalities Select Committee. The Roundtable discussions looked at different issues including addressing domestic violence and encouraging young women to get involved in politics in rural areas.
On Thursday I had the opportunity to chair the forum on The Voices of Young Women: Challenges and opportunities in achieving gender equality and the empowerment of rural women and girls. The forum brought women together to discuss the diverse issues that prevent gender equality in rural areas.
Representatives from different NGOs in the forum spoke on the challenges and action required to improve access to sexual reproductive healthcare for rural women and girls, the importance of breaking the cycle of poverty for young women and girls, and how quality education can act as a catalyst for the advancement of women and girls.
It was very insightful to listen to the representatives share stories of women and girls in rural communities and the issues preventing them from receiving gender equality. Issues included lack of access to electricity and technical skills, female medical students receiving threats and judgment from their communities and in some cases being beaten, and poor infrastructure making access to school difficult.
On Friday my schedule allowed for me to attend a day of seminars and forums hosted by different NGOs, including “Transforming Society through Empowerment of Rural Women” hosted by the International Council of Women and, a forum on Innovating the use of the Media for Rural Women, held by the Pacific Rim Institute for Development Education.
Hosted by the National Alliance of Women’s Organisations (NAWO), “The Making the media female: action to make the face and feeling of the media female” forum which followed, involved discussions to help highlight key actions and interventions required to drive gender equality in the media. The event allowed for representatives to examine key challenges and systemic barriers to gender equality in the media, and also explored innovative solutions for women to access the media.
Attending the 62nd Annual Commission on the Status of Women highlighted two key factors for me. First, the absolute necessity of keeping gender equality issues high on the political agenda both at home in the UK and internationally, and second, in order to gain and maintain rights for women they have to be campaigned for constantly.
It was refreshing that the CSW62 agreed a set of strong outcomes to uphold the rights of women and girls, which acknowledged the particular needs of women and girls in rural areas. You can find the outcomes here: http://www.unwomen.org/-/media/headquarters/attachments/sections/csw/62/outcome/csw62-agreed-conclusions-advanced-unedited-version-en.pdf?la=en&vs=3837
More than ever CSW this year demonstrated the value of women parliamentarians coming together to learn from each other. It showed the value of partnerships be it between governments or between parliamentarians and NGOs in early identification of problems and finding solutions that work. That includes getting women and girls access to employment opportunities and education, securing safe reproductive health, tackling violence and abuse, and addressing climate change.
Finally, I would like to give a huge thank you to the BGIPU and Zarin Hainsworth of NAWO for organising the liaison between the UK parliamentarians and various NGOS at the CSW.
In March I had the opportunity to attend the 62nd Annual Session of the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) for five days at the UN headquarters in New...
The End Child Poverty Coalition recently released the shocking statistic that 4 million British children are now growing up in relative poverty, and more than two-thirds of these live in a household where at least one parent is in work.
These statistics mean that child poverty is at its highest level since 2010, with the figure of 4 million representing around 30% of UK children. A child is said to live in poverty if they are in a family living on less than 60% of median household income. After housing costs, this is around £248 per week.
This level of poverty has a huge impact on both the daily lives, and the wider life chances, of many millions of children, and Labour has been clear that this is absolutely unacceptable in modern Britain.
Of course, child poverty figures necessarily represent an average, with the End Child Poverty Coalition reporting that there are some areas, particularly in large cities, where over half of the children are growing up in poverty. In my own constituency of City of Durham, four wards contain over 30% of children living in poverty, after housing costs are taken into account. Belmont ward has 765 children living in poverty – above the national average, at 32.7%, Coxhoe has 757 and Deerness has 809, at 30.2%. Elvet and Gilesgate has 36.5% of its children living in poverty.
These figures are an indictment of government policy since 2010, and make a mockery of the Prime Minister’s claim that her government is tackling inequality.
Issues like these can seem abstract, but I see in my regular surgeries in Durham how low pay, the increased cost of living, and issues with benefits payments have pushed families, most of whom are in work, to the point of destitution.
It is shocking that in this day and age there are families where parents are having to decide between heating or food, or where working people have to visit food banks to make ends meet. Not only does Durham now have several food banks, it also has a clothing bank for people who cannot even afford second hand clothes and school uniforms for their families.
Aside from the issues of low pay and increased costs of living, the government is making this situation worse for those on low incomes through its policies on in-work benefits. Although Universal Credit was supposed to simplify the benefits system so that people would always be better off in work, in practice the many issues with its implementation mean that working people on low pay will in many cases be worse off once Universal Credit is rolled out.
Labour have called on the government to halt the roll-out of Universal Credit until its problems have been fixed, and have been working in Parliament to tackle the related issue of child malnutrition and holiday hunger in families on low income.
The issue of holiday hunger has been on my radar from some time, after having spoken with many families whose children are on Free School Meals who struggle to provide meals for their children throughout the school holidays. I have visited holiday hunger clubs in Durham to better understand the service they provide, and have put pressure on Durham County Council to widen their provision during school holidays.
I have also met with representatives of various groups in my constituency to discuss setting up a pilot scheme to provide meals for children on Free School Meals throughout the holidays.
In Parliament, I helped set up the APPG for School Food, and remain a Vice-Chair. This APPG is a cross-Parliamentary group which works to provide a parliamentary forum for the discussion of all matters relating to food education in schools and other settings and to push the issue of food in schools up the political agenda.
I have long supported the provision of Free School Meals for all children whose families receive universal credit, and I was proud of Labour’s manifesto commitment to provide hot school lunches for all primary school pupils at the last General Election. Not only does this tackle the scourge of hunger, numerous studies have shown that children who eat a hot, healthy meal at lunchtime have improved educational outcomes.
On 19th January, I voted in support of Labour’s School Holidays (Meals and Activities Bill), which would ensure that children who are in receipt of Free School Meals during term time would also receive meals throughout the school holidays. This Bill passed, and I understand the government is currently trialling pilots based on the Bill, which should work towards alleviating holiday hunger across the country. This is a welcome first step that will materially benefit some of the poorest families in the country.
I have also called on the government to halt its plans to end the current entitlement to free school meals for all children from families who receive Universal Credit. These measures should stay in place, as under the proposed new system, children from families who receive Universal Credit will stop receiving free school meals once their parents hit an income threshold of £7,400 per year. This income threshold represents a cliff-edge that will be detrimental to families and ultimately worsen child nutrition across the country, and will mean that 1 million extra schoolchildren in poverty who could benefit from free school meals now won’t.
It also goes against one of the founding principles of universal credit: to always make work pay.
Along with my Labour colleagues, I believe the current transitional system, whereby all children from families that are on Universal Credit, receive free school meals, should remain in place, and I was pleased that a Westminster Hall debate was granted last week to discuss the issue. Keeping the transitional measures in place will reduce bureaucracy, ensure that all children who need it receive a hot, healthy meal each day, and make sure that work always pays.
Since 2010, child poverty has risen again to its current, unacceptable levels, but I am proud of Labour’s record in government on child poverty. Between 1997 – 2010, child poverty fell by a quarter and we implemented a host of policies designed to tackle child poverty. From increases in existing benefits to new child-targeted assistance, investments in early years’ intervention to programmes to help lone parents into work, a wide range of actions increased incomes and provided tailored services to help families living in poverty.
In my role as Labour MP for the City of Durham, I am doing all I can to push the government to tackle the blight of child poverty, but only a Labour government will take the measures necessary to bring these shocking figures down.
We can start by urging the government to keep the transitional measures in place for Universal Credit, and not introduce an income threshold for eligibility for free school meals which would mean that low-income families will lose out. Labour will continue to push for children on free school meals to have access to food and activities throughout the school holidays, and we will support all efforts in Parliament to ensure that all children have access to nutritious food, both at school and at home. There is no justification for anything less in modern Britain.
The End Child Poverty Coalition recently released the shocking statistic that 4 million British children are now growing up in relative poverty, and more than two-thirds of these live in...
Following the announcement that Marks and Spencer will close the Durham City store in April 2018, I have written to the company to ask them to consider alternative locations within the city for a Simply Food store and cafe.
It is vital that Durham remains a vibrant and attractive for residents and visitors, and the loss of M&S will be a blow to the city centre.
I will share their response to my request in due course.
Following the announcement that Marks and Spencer will close the Durham City store in April 2018, I have written to the company to ask them to consider alternative locations within...
As Virgin East Coast, which runs rail services on the East Coast Mainline, gets closer to collapse, I asked the Secretary of State for Transport why the public company East Coast was blocked by his department from bidding for the franchise.
When East Coast previously ran the rail services on this line, it operated an efficient and cost effective service, and so I pressed the Secretary of State to change the rules to allow public companies to bid for rail franchises in the future.
You can see me challenge the Secretary of State here:
As Virgin East Coast, which runs rail services on the East Coast Mainline, gets closer to collapse, I asked the Secretary of State for Transport why the public company East...
As we celebrate 100 years of women's suffrage, it is fitting that 2018 will see the return of the Women's Gala in Wharton Park on Saturday 30 June. In Parliament, I took the opportunity to ask the Home Secretary to join me in paying tribute to the women who are organising this wonderful event.
You can watch me speaking in Westminster here:
As we celebrate 100 years of women's suffrage, it is fitting that 2018 will see the return of the Women's Gala in Wharton Park on Saturday 30 June. In Parliament,...
An independent British trade policy must put the interests of developing countries at its heart
Last week I spoke in Parliament during the Second Reading of the Trade Bill, to speak up for sustainable development and call on the government to put fair trade at the heart of an independent British trade policy.
The bill seeks to replicate in UK law the existing trade arrangements with countries outside the EU. As with the EU Withdrawal Bill, I have deep concerns about the power that this bill would hand to Ministers to change and implement legislation without Parliamentary scrutiny, when Labour has been clear that all aspects of Britain’s trade negotiations should be subject to impact assessments and debated openly in Parliament.
This bill also contains implications for international development policy, which it seems the government has not fully considered.
Under current EU rules, the world’s Least Developed Countries (LDCs), including aid recipients like Uganda and Bangladesh, have access to the EU ‘Everything but Arms’ scheme, whereby there are zero tariffs or quotas on any of their exports to the single market (excluding arms).
This scheme is estimated to be worth £12.5 billion to 49 of the world’s poorest countries, and also gives EU consumers access to cheaper goods, mainly foodstuffs. There are a range of other trade preference schemes for developing countries, and in some cases, such as Botswana, countries have ‘graduated’ from the LDC category as their economies have grown through trade.
Trade policy can seem abstract, but on a recent trip to Bangladesh, I visited a Fairtrade co-operative which exports around the world, including to the UK. The workers there enjoyed good working conditions and decent rates of pay, and I left feeling optimistic about how international trade, done fairly and equitably, can reduce poverty.
The Fairtrade foundation has itself expressed concerns about the impact of Brexit on Fairtrade, as the Fairtrade market is worth £1.6 billion to the UK, and relies on a seamless trading relationship between all of the countries of the EU.
The government has been very clear that trade is the best route out of poverty for small countries. If it is serious about this – if this is not just an attack on the concept of foreign aid – then Labour is clear that the government needs to put development and poverty reduction at the heart of an independent British trade policy. From small farmers in Africa exporting Fairtrade bananas, to the Bangladeshi co-operative workers I visited, millions of peoples’ livelihoods are at risk if the UK does not put development at the heart of its new trade policy.
The Overseas Development Institute (ODI) has recommend that the UK should, at the least, apply the principle of ‘do no harm’ to any new trade deals, so that existing trade preference schemes for developing countries are rolled over, and that Britain’s trade and development policies are aligned.
In addition, other international development charities such as Global Justice Now have recommended that Britain takes this opportunity to improve on some aspects of existing EU schemes, which have in some cases been criticised for extracting damaging concessions from countries that can ill afford them. Britain can become a standard-bearer for fair international trade, and not allow the Tories to fashion a free trade policy which uses our leverage to further exploit some of the world’s poorest countries.
The Government has stated that it is the responsibility of all government departments to work towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which are 17 goals set by the United Nations related to economic development, peace, human rights and the environment that all countries, developed and developing, have signed up to achieving.
It would therefore be absurd for the Department for International Trade to be working at cross-purposes with the Department for International Development, which it will be if it does not put the SDGs at the heart of Britain’s new trade policy with developing countries.
I have received a large amount of correspondence on the Trade Bill from my constituents. This demonstrates the strength of feeling that exists on the issue, and the commitment that exists to the principles of fair trade amongst the British public.
Whilst MPs have rightly focused on the potential outcomes of a ‘no deal’ with the EU for Britain and our constituencies, we should also not forget that ‘no deal’ between Britain and developing countries could represent a catastrophe for some of the world’s poorest people.
An independent British trade policy must put the interests of developing countries at its heart Last week I spoke in Parliament during the Second Reading of the Trade Bill, to...
Like many people, Roberta has been concerned by the appointment of Toby Young to the board of the newly created Office for Students. Both his lack of experience in academia,...
On Tuesday this week, I held a Westminster Hall debate on the plight of the Rohingya in Bangladesh, following my visit to the refugee camps earlier this month as part of a cross-party delegation organised by the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) and the UNHCR
The debate was heavily oversubscribed, with many colleagues making powerful speeches calling on the government to do all it can to help the plight of the Rohingya people.
I focussed on the situation in the camps, and on the humanitarian response by the Department for International Development, UK aid agencies and the international community. I wanted to take the opportunity to pay tribute to the amazing work done by British NGOs on the ground during this crisis, and I reiterated that the UK needs to do all it can to provide assistance to allow life in the camps to improve for the hundreds of thousands of residents, who at present are struggling to have even basic needs met.
As my visit brought home to me, both the scale of the camps, and the scale of need is vast. In the debate, I raised how the International Rescue Committee (IRC) has estimated that nearly 300,000 people need food security assistance, more than 400,000 people need health care and of the 453,000 Rohingya children requiring education in the camps, only around 40,000 are receiving any form of education. For as long as the Rohingyas are living in the camps, the UK and international community must ensure that international aid is providing for the everyday needs of the Rohingya, so that camp life can improve and that education at all levels is available.
In the longer-term, it is imperative that the issue of statelessness of the Rohingyas is addressed, as it was clear from my visit to the camps that resolving the issue of citizenship is essential to the future of the Rohingya.
I also raised the issue of the recent deal signed between Myanmar and Bangladesh, and urged the UK government to use its leverage to ensure that any refugee returns are safe, informed and voluntary.
On Tuesday this week, I held a Westminster Hall debate on the plight of the Rohingya in Bangladesh, following my visit to the refugee camps earlier this month as part...
Last week, when Parliament was in recess, I had the opportunity to travel to Bangladesh to attend the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) annual conference. The CPA is a global organisation that brings together Parliamentarians from across the Commonwealth and supports them to promote good governance in Parliamentary systems around the world.
After the Conference, along with a cross-party group of MPs, I went to Cox’s Bazaar to visit the Rohingya refugee camps, which are currently home to over 800,000 people.
My visit helped me to understand the action that I can take as the Shadow Minister for International Development to push the UK government to do all it can to help with the crisis. It also made clear the vast scale of the camps, as the mass exodus from Myanmar following the violence in Rakhine state is one of the largest population movements in living memory.
This is the equivalent of a city the size of Manchester establishing itself overnight with no prior infrastructure, housing, or sanitation. Walking around the camp, which was possible on our visit because the rains had stopped and the mud was dry, what struck me most apart from the obvious destitution was the scale. Wherever we turned the camp was visible far into the distance. Given the speed of the exodus from Myanmar, it had not been possible to properly plan the camp, and with new people arriving all the time the camp was a sea of makeshift shelters stretching as far as the eye could see.
Upon arrival, we were keen to hear from the Rohingyas themselves about what they thought the camps most urgently needed, and so on arrival at Kutupalong camp we met a group of community leaders, both men and women.
The conversation started off as expected – they described how there was not enough of anything; space, water, education, sanitation, clothes, food, shelter. But perhaps what surprised us most was that despite the very real hardship they were experiencing, what they most wanted was citizenship. This was to be a recurring theme of our visit.
One encounter has particularly stayed with me. In our first meeting at the camp, I spoke with a young man aged 25, who had been born in the camp, as his parents had fled from Myanmar in an earlier displacement in 1992.
He recognised the need for more food and other supplies but said what he most wanted more than anything was citizenship, because then he could make his own way in the world. Unfortunately, this will not be easily achieved at present. The military in Myanmar have a long history of refusing citizenship to the Rohingyas, and Bangladesh is reluctant to give permanent residency to so many people in a very poor area of a low income country. International pressure to solve this particular issue is of the utmost urgency and importance.
Our next stop was at a school, which children attend in shifts due to a lack of places. Like all young children they were excited by visitors and keen to show us what they were learning. The teachers made much of the fact that the school was actually functioning because just a few short weeks ago it had to close to accommodate 600 newly arrived Rohingya pupils in a small area. As with all schools, it was a place of hope, but this glimpse of normality was short lived. On our way out, we noticed that two families were living under a single piece of tarpaulin, and this was a warning of what was to come.
We passed a large queue for food and saw the distribution of new shelter materials and basic household and personal items, including basic clothing packages.
We also visited a transit camp, recently established by the UNHCR, where new arrivals traumatised and injured by their experiences in Myanmar and long journey are given space to have their medical and personal needs assessed before moving to the camp. This showed the difference that international efforts are making to the lives of the displayed Rohingyas, and the contrast between the care and compassion showed by the staff, and the violence so recently suffered by the Rohingya in Rakhine state was heart-wrenching to consider.
We were moved and distressed by what we had seen, but we were determined to remain focused on what we could do to help the situation. Our discussions with the camp residents, local officials, UNHCR and NGOs left me with four issues to take up in Parliament.
Firstly, the UK and other international aid is essential in ensuring the basic needs of the Rohingya are met and that camp life can improve. In my role as Shadow Minister for International Development, I am determined to protect both an independent Department for International Development, and the UK’s commitment to spending 0.7% of GDP on international aid against Tory threats to cut both.
Secondly, the camps need more space, and it is urgent that Bangladesh determines as soon as possible how this can be achieved.
Thirdly, staff and volunteers from UNHCR and NGOs are doing an amazing job servicing the camp and supporting the Rohingya. They don’t seek recognition for their efforts but their amazing work in difficult times circumstances should be acknowledged.
Fourthly, the underlying problem of the Rohingya is not only the violence and persecution they face in Myanmar, but also their lack of citizenship. Without citizenship, they cannot access the support and services needed to rebuild their lives in Bangladesh, as it is unclear whether the Rohingya will ever be able to return to Myanmar following the violence they have experienced at the hands of the Burmese military.
While my trip to the camp was in many ways a harrowing experience, it was a privilege to meet the amazing staff and volunteers at the camps, and to speak to some of the Rohingya refugees myself. It has re-affirmed my commitment to doing all I can to make sure the UK plays its part in these humanitarian crises.
Last week, when Parliament was in recess, I had the opportunity to travel to Bangladesh to attend the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) annual conference. The CPA is a global organisation...