To ask His Majesty’s Government what steps they have taken to coordinate with international partners to address the proliferation of antisemitism in international human rights bodies, as reported by organisations such as UN Watch and NGO Monitor.

My Lords, after the heinous events in north London just a few days ago, we must state once more that antisemitism has no place in our or any society. This Government are committed to stamping it out wherever and however it occurs, both in the UK and around the world. At the UN, OSCE and other multilateral fora, we consistently speak out against antisemitism and co-ordinate effective action to combat it in collaboration with international partners. This includes raising concerns directly at senior levels when they arise.

My Lords, I am sorry that two Questions this morning have to deal with antisemitism—I never thought it would come to this. Unfortunately, the United Nations and other bodies, such as Amnesty International and the United Nations Human Rights Council, treat Israel—and have done for a long time—as the emblem of everything that is bad in the world, making no distinction between Jews and the state. For example, the resolutions they have passed over the last few years greatly outweigh resolutions on any other state. The epitome of this perversion is Francesca Albanese, special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories, whose antisemitic comments verge on the deranged, blaming Mossad for the Charlie Hebdo murders, comparing Israel with the Third Reich and calling it the common enemy of humanity, and saying the BBC is an Israel lobby. Will the UK join France, Germany, Czech and Austria in calling for her dismissal?

I hear what the noble Baroness is saying and it is true. I agree that Francesca Albanese has a history of making inflammatory comments such as this. Although special rapporteurs do not represent the UN, they are associated with the UN. We understand that they are independent, but it matters, and we have raised these concerns directly. The right way for this to be done is that special rapporteurs need to have objectivity and credibility. Where there are concerns, the comments that have been made need to be tested against the code of conduct, and then appropriate decisions ought to be taken.

My Lords, I associate myself totally with the Minister’s remarks about the fight against antisemitism, both in the UK and internationally. On specific action with international partners, she will know that the previous Government, in 2023, together with the United Arab Emirates, passed Resolution 2686, which targeted the issues of antisemitism, Islamophobia and, importantly, the persecution of and hate against Christians globally. That is the kind of collaboration we need. I seek the Minister’s reassurance that we will continue to collaborate with international partners on specific initiatives such as those.

I meet regularly with our FORB envoy, David Smith, and support him very much in the work that he is doing around the world on this. I acknowledge, as I find myself doing very frequently at the Dispatch Box, the work that the noble Lord led in his time in the Foreign Office.

My Lords, does my noble friend the Minister agree that it is often difficult to draw the appropriate line between legitimate criticism of Israel—for example, in relation to Gaza and Iran—and antisemitism? Will she agree to undertake robustly to challenge any state that goes beyond that line into antisemitism?

I do not find it difficult to draw the line between criticism of the State of Israel and antisemitism. I have expressed my concerns on the record around some of the problems with access of aid into Gaza, for example, and other issues over time. At no point does this criticism ever get anywhere near anything that could be described as antisemitic. People who do not know the difference need to educate themselves, and it is their responsibility to make sure that any comments they make could never be interpreted as being antisemitic. It is perfectly possible to hold strong views about the Middle East without being antisemitic. We need to be clear about that.

My Lords, it is disturbing that Jewish individuals and communities feel themselves vulnerable to attacks, threats, criticisms and abuse. It is absolutely right, especially if it comes from within international organisations that we support, that we call it out, condemn it and show solidarity to the community. I echo the words that have been said. There is legitimate criticism of Israel, and it is perfectly possible to criticise. I chaired two committee reports that were very critical of Israel. Never did we stray anywhere near antisemitism. Criticism of Israel should never be justification for making antisemitic remarks. The State of Israel and the worldwide Jewish community are different and separate, and can always be kept separate.

I broadly agree with the comments of the noble Lord.

My Lords, as noble Lords have said, we should all be deeply concerned by the resurgence of antisemitism around the world. We must all unequivocally condemn the sickening recent incidents in our own country. The definition of antisemitism agreed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance is widely, though not universally, accepted, including by our own Government. It has also been adopted by the Church of England. Attached to that definition is a list of 11 possible examples of contemporary antisemitism, of which seven reference attitudes to the State of Israel. Would the Minister agree that one-sided, simplistic or inaccurate accounts of what is a complex and contested situation in Israel-Palestine can fuel the growth of antisemitism and other forms of religious hatred, including in our own country? If so, what support are His Majesty’s Government able to give to interfaith organisations that seek to present more balanced views and to encourage dialogue and learning around these difficult issues?

Interfaith organisations have an important role to play in this area and in many others, too. The Government are willing to, and do, work alongside many interfaith organisations in this endeavour.

My Lords, recently, the Health Secretary introduced welcome powers to dismiss antisemitic medics. Will the Government consider applying similar provisions to international organisations that we fund?

I am not aware of any international organisation that we fund where we have direct capability to hire and fire. That is not how multilateral organisations tend to work. As I have said, we raise concerns directly and openly about the conduct of individuals, as and when that is the right thing to do. We will continue to work in that way.

My Lords—

My Lords—

My Lords, we will hear from the Cross Benches next and then the Labour Benches.

My Lords, does the Minister accept that the UN Human Rights Council has placed a disproportionate focus on Israel over the years? If she does accept that, what will the Government do to genuinely combat the institutional antisemitism that that can entrench?

As my friend the noble Lord will know, we are opposed to item 7 in the Human Rights Council, and we will use our leadership to try to persuade others that that is not an appropriate item to have. That is probably what he is getting at, and I suspect we probably agree.

My Lords, we were the first country in the world to adopt the IHRA definition. We are regarded by many countries, in some areas, as being world-leading in how we tackle antisemitism, not least in the way in which we have succeeded in working on a cross-party basis for the last two decades in challenging antisemitism, unlike many other countries. The Foreign Office has often been a little shy in briefing our embassies and commissions abroad on some of our successes. Could it perhaps be encouraged to do more in letting our representatives abroad know what some of our successes are, so that we can have an honest dialogue, about both successes and failures, show others what we are doing well and learn from others?

I have not detected and was not aware of the timidity that the noble Lord alluded to. I am very happy to have further conversations on how we can appropriately talk with our allies and partners around the world about the work we have done.