Transcription
The attacks against the Jewish community in recent months have been devastating. As the leader of the opposition, uh, and the independent reviewer of terror legislation have said, this is a national emergency. While the government noted that the raising of the terror threat level was not solely a consequence of the attack in Golden Green, we can all see how this community has been targeted. Our thoughts remain with the victims and their families.
We have to speak honestly about what's going on. We have to call out hate when we see it. Jewish people in Britain are 12 times more likely to be a victim of hate crime than any other group. We cannot allow this to go on. This requires not just warm words but robust action. That means authorizing the surveillance powers usually reserved for counterterrorism that the minister has referenced today to identify and prevent anti-semitic attacks that are being planned. Furthermore, foreign nationals who express anti-semitism, support extremism, or endorse terrorism should be deported. The government should place a moratorium on hate-fueled pro-Palestine marches because we can see the way in which they are being used as a cover to promote violence and intimidation against Jewish people. Furthermore, while I welcome the government's announcement of legislation in the King's speech, it needs to act at speed. Steps need to be taken to prescribe groups that fuel this hatred, such as the IRGC. This was recommended almost 12 months ago, so I hope it is now a top priority for the government. Members on this side of the house stand ready to support its implementation.
Ultimately, the measures I've outlined do not begin to cover the full extent of the action we need to take to stop this evil. We need to tackle the underlying ideologies that threaten our national security. Therefore, it's critical that the government focuses on the ideologies which pose the greatest threat. As I've said to the House during the statement on anti-semitic attacks in April, 75% of MI5's terrorism case load relates to Islamist extremism. And 94% of terrorist murders in the last 25 years have been perpetrated by Islamist extremists. Yet we've seen a decrease in Prevent referrals relating to Islamist extremism, and only 10% of the current Prevent case load relates to Islamist extremism. Can the minister explain what more the government will do to address this disparity and ensure that we tackle Islamist extremism effectively?
Equally, talking about the threat posed by China is not an abstract matter. There are people in this country who've had bounties placed upon them and who face threats because of the Chinese regime. Police Officer David Wilson recently published his report into Chinese organized crime links to the Chinese state, including its intelligence services, diplomatic service, and the United Front Work Department. The report demonstrates how Chinese intelligence services and even diplomats work with organized crime networks to suppress dissidents and intimidate British Chinese communities and students into compliance. Therefore, I ask the government, as many of my colleagues have done before, to place China in the enhanced tier of the foreign influence registration scheme. We share the government's concerns about the continued threat posed by Russia. Will the minister join me in condemning the fact that Russia has issued an arrest warrant for our former colleague Ben Wallace? Does he agree this is totally unacceptable? And will he use all of his endeavors to look into this matter?
The increase in the threat level illustrates the risks posed to this country. Many of the measures set out by the minister will be welcomed, but I believe we need a fundamental shift that reflects the scale of the threats facing the country and particularly the Jewish community. We must maintain an absolute focus on stamping out the ideologies which fuel hatred and undermine our national security. I believe that is how we pay tribute to those who've been victims of these devastating terrorist attacks.
>> Mr. Speaker, I'm very grateful to the shadow minister for the very sensible and reasonable approach that he's taken this morning, and I agree with him. These are matters that, wherever possible, we should be seeking to work on a cross-party political basis, and that's absolutely going to be my approach. I do want to agree with him in terms of the appalling and abhorrent attacks that we've seen recently on the Jewish community. I hope he understands that the government is absolutely committed to dealing with this poisonous hatred. I spelt out in my opening remarks some of the measures, uh, that the government have taken, uh, and will continue to take. He, he's right though to hold us to account. This isn't about warm words. This needs to be about deeds, and that's precisely why we've taken the decision to allocate more funding, uh, to support this activity than has been the case previously. And we will take every opportunity to ensure that our response, collectively as a nation, is proportionate to the nature of the threat that is faced by British Jews across the country. It is abhorrent that any British Jew might feel the need to lead a smaller Jewish life, and I hope that that is a matter of complete agreement across this House. But I give him and the House an absolute assurance that we will do everything, everything that we can to make sure that our Jewish communities not only are safe but feel safe.
Now, again, entirely reasonably, um, he raised concerns about, um, uh, hate marches, protest activity that's taken place, and, um, may, um, seek to take place in the future. I, I hope again it is a point of consensus to say that the right to protest is fundamental to our democracy, but at the same time, this cannot cross the line into unlawful or violent behavior. Now, the police do have a range of existing powers that enable them to tackle unlawful behavior, including at marches. But I think it's important to note that these will soon include new measures, uh, contained within the Crime and Policing Act, which received Royal Assent at the end of April, to further restrict intimidatory protests, particularly around places of worship, and new offenses around face coverings at protest. The Act also places a duty on senior officers to take account of the cumulative impact of protest activity when considering whether to impose conditions on a protest. So protests that follow the same routes time and time again can be forced to change their route, or the time of, of a protest. And he will know, as will other right honorable and honorable members, that the Home Secretary has asked Lord Macdonald to lead an independent review of public order and hate crime legislation, and we look forward to receiving Lord Macdonald's, uh, recommendations in, in the near future.
Now, again, he made an entirely reasonable point, I thought, about the disparity in the Prevent case load. He's right about that. I hope that he would acknowledge that that is not a new challenge. That is a challenge that the previous government faced, and this government faced. He'll be aware that we've appointed a new independent Prevent Commissioner, and I'll be meeting with him later today, and I categorically guarantee that that will be on the agenda for our discussion. So we do take the point he's made very seriously, but I know that he will understand it's not a new challenge for government. He referenced China. Um, I, I hope I was clear in my introductory remarks about the concern that I have about the unique range of threats that China, uh, levels against the United Kingdom, but I hope that he would also accept that there are areas where, of course, we do need to cooperate closely with China, and there is always a balance to be struck. But I do give him an absolute assurance that national security will always be our, our priority. He mentioned FURS, and I suspect other honorable members may take the opportunity to mention it as well. FURS is still a relatively new tool. I'm making sure that we're able to draw the maximum operational benefit from it. Um, and any decisions will be communicated to Parliament in, in the normal way.
Finally, I do just want to respond to the point that he made about Ben Wallace. So, let me be crystal clear. The accusations that were made, uh, about Ben Wallace are completely unacceptable. Ben Wallace is someone who's served our country, and for reasons that the honorable gentleman will completely understand, I'm obviously not going to get into the individual security arrangements for Mr. Wallace, and I can't and won't comment on operational or intelligence matters. But I can say that I've met Ben Wallace to discuss the concerns that he has understandably raised. I am in touch with him, and I will make sure that we continually assess the nature of the threats to individuals and their safety, and that we, as a government, will be absolutely on the front foot in identifying and investigating such threats, and that we will use all appropriate measures to defend against those threats. Any attempt by any foreign government to coerce, intimidate, harass, or harm their critics in the United Kingdom, including Mr. Wallace, will not be tolerated.
Rachel