Oral evidence: Crisis in Yemen, HC 532Wednesday 27 January 2016
Oral evidence, 27 January 2016.
Witnesses
Rt Hon Desmond Swayne MP, Minister of State for International Development, Juliette John, Head of DFID Yemen, Department for International Development, Tobias Ellwood MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and Nicholas Alton, Deputy Head of Arabian Peninsula and Iran, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, gave evidence.
Chair
Can I welcome the Ministers and their officials? Thank you very much indeed for joining us this afternoon. We have 55 minutes for this session, because a number of Members of the Committee have other commitments at 3pm, if that can be borne in mind as we go through the questions. Typically the questions are directed at one or other department, but sometimes clearly both of you will want to respond. I am going to ask Lisa if she could lead off with a question.
Dr Cameron
Thank you. The first question is to Minister Swayne. We have heard today that the situation on the ground is very bleak. I am aware that 71% are unemployed, schools have been closed for six months and there has been no electricity for six months in Taiz. Airstrikes are hitting clinics and civilian targets. There is serious malnutrition, particularly among children, and high infant mortality. What is your assessment of how serious the humanitarian situation is in Yemen?
Mr Swayne
It is as you have described it and that is serious. It is a Level 3 emergency and it is essential, therefore, that we pursue primarily a peace process and we bend every effort to that; secondly, that we increase the volume of commercial shipping that can get to the country, because Yemen relies almost wholly on imported food and fuel; thirdly, that we secure proper lawful humanitarian access for the agencies to deliver aid; and finally, that we secure resources from the international community. We have doubled our aid ourselves. The Secretary of State announced a further £10 million just recently. We have doubled our own aid in the last year. We need to do more lobbying and agitating at the international level. The Secretary of State held a side event, notwithstanding the very busy agenda at the UN General Assembly in September, which raised a further £85 million from other donors.
Dr Cameron
There are 12.2 million people in need of humanitarian assistance in Syria, compared with 21.2 million in Yemen. However, DFID has pledged over £1.1 billion to Syria and only £85 million to Yemen. The UN humanitarian response plan for Yemen is only 56% funded. Is enough funding being directed towards Yemen, given the scale of the humanitarian situation there, and what more feasibly can the Government do?
Mr Swayne
Clearly not enough is being provided. That is why we have been agitating for other donors to provide more. I would not say that we have provided “only £85 million”. We have provided £85 million, which is proportionate to what is capable of being spent by our partners at the moment, given the difficulties of access. You make an unfair comparison: £1.1 billion for a crisis that is proceeding now into its fifth year against one that is in its first. Secondly, with respect to Syria, access to the populations in need is much greater—4 million people are lodged in camps in surrounding countries, to which we have absolute access with which to make humanitarian provision. That is simply not the case, as we have heard from the evidence given. Access is very difficult. The ability to get in there and effectively spend money is very much more difficult. As to the comparison made of the situations, they are both Level 3 emergencies. This year, 8,000 casualties is a horrible figure. There were 8,000 civilian casualties in Yemen, but where are we in Syria? At 450,000 and counting.
Dr Cameron
Given your response, does that suggest that you foresee a scaling‑up of efforts in Yemen, as time progresses and if a greater peace process can be established and easier access obtained?
Mr Swayne
Even now, we have a series of meetings beginning next month working on the recovery and reconstruction of Yemen. We will have a multi‑year offer that we will announce in due course. The department is even now working through its budgets. There is a huge level of need and we will have to address it.
Dr Cameron
As you will be aware, Yemen has been called the forgotten war. The profile of the humanitarian crisis in Yemen has been relatively low, given the situation. What can the UK Government do to raise the profile of this conflict internationally and particularly with other donors?
Mr Swayne
I hope that this Committee has a role in raising its profile. It may be a forgotten war, but it has not been forgotten by us—as I say, £85 million. We have just increased it by another £10 million. The Secretary of State, as I say, held a side meeting at the UN General Assembly to secure more funding. Last June and July, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and the Secretary of State for DFID lobbied international partners to secure more. I was in the Gulf last week, principally because of the Syria conference on 4 June, but with every interlocutor with whom I engaged I raised the need for more on Yemen.
Dr Cameron
Will you be making sure that the UK has a leadership role in terms of improving international recognition of this conflict?
Mr Swayne
We have that and we certainly want to maintain that. We are the fourth largest donor but in terms of the leadership that we have taken with the UN verification and inspection mechanism for shipping, the agitation that we have done in the UN and in the region, we have much more of a leadership role than the mere fourth, in terms of the amount that we have donated.
Wendy Morton
Just to come back very briefly, Minister, can you clarify that point you made about the link between scaling up and access to the areas of need? Am I right in thinking that there is a direct link, in the sense that you would be willing to consider putting in more aid if there was better access on the ground and if there was the ability to distribute?
Mr Swayne
Yes, and because of the huge danger that we have heard our partners on the ground are incurring. Look at what has happened to Médecins Sans Frontières and the number of staff that they have lost, who have been killed. These things clearly have an impact on what we could do. If there were a peace process, we could do more on education. At the moment, we are concentrating not wholly but almost exclusively on life preservation.
Fiona Bruce
The head of UNICEF Yemen has just given us evidence that, if there were more humanitarian provision, they could reach areas. There is access that they can obtain. DFID does work there through the NGOs but, as I understand, it does not have any staff on the ground in Yemen. They have been removed from Yemen for some time. Would there be any consideration to returning staff there, so that you could have an on‑the‑ground view, as we have had from the head of UNICEF here?
Mr Swayne
I would return staff there when it is safe to do so but, even before this crisis, our staff were effectively trapped in Sana’a. We have done the monitoring of our programmes largely through independent third parties to ensure that our money is being spent properly, because of the inability to get out. I am confident that the UN is putting more staff into the region, which is helpful. I am very pleased that the UN Humanitarian Co-ordinator, Jamie McGoldrick, visited Taiz last week. I came across him in Nepal and agitated for him to be moved to the Yemen, so I am very pleased that he has been. I think that he will have a very fundamental effect on the operation.
Fiona Bruce
At the moment, there are no moves to replace in‑country staff in Yemen.
Mr Swayne
We work extensively through partners and we do so because of the access that they have, including the local partner, the Social Fund for Development, which has had a great reach. We are very satisfied with their approach. Clearly if there were a peace process, if there were a ceasefire being observed, a great deal more relief could be delivered. There has been relief delivered to Taiz, but the problem is the distribution of it. Now, the UN is wrestling with how to achieve a proper distribution of what has got into Taiz but, while people are being blown to smithereens, it makes life very difficult.
Fiona Bruce
Just to close, what the head of UNICEF has just said to us is that, if there were more aid provided, they could distribute it now.
Mr Swayne
I am confident that, if there was not a warzone to operate in, a lot more could be done.
Juliette John
DFID staff will return as soon as the UK embassy reopens, but that is part of a broader consideration of staff security. We were there until February last year, and we have local Yemeni staff as well, who were there a bit beyond that, who are now mostly out of the country. UNICEF is also our biggest programme, as part of the £85 million, so they already receive a significant amount of funding from us.
Chair
We are going to move now to the issue of UK military support to Saudi Arabia, where there will be questions for both Ministers. I am going to ask Albert to ask the first question.
Albert Owen
Good afternoon, Ministers and staff. Evidence to this Committee has been overwhelming that the UK support for the Saudi‑led coalition is undermining DFID’s humanitarian efforts. How would you respond to that? We have had evidence from Oxfam and others to say that some branches of the UK Government are fuelling the conflict through supporting arms exports.
Mr Swayne
Is that for me?
Albert Owen
Mr Swayne, that is for you to begin with.
Mr Swayne
The United Kingdom is not a party to this conflict. We are not at war. We support the restoration of the lawful government of the Yemen. Now, I have found that my support for that principle has given me a level of access with which I am able to agitate for greater humanitarian access and relief and greater provision to make shipping available—
Albert Owen
With respect, that is not the question.
Mr Swayne
—and indeed the observation of humanitarian law.
Albert Owen
Sure, but that is not the question. The question is, and it is coming from evidence we are receiving from third parties: is your work being undermined by the fact that we are exporting arms to Saudi Arabia? It is a simple question.
Mr Swayne
There is no evidence that I have that that is the case.
Albert Owen
There is no evidence of that.
Mr Swayne
There is no evidence available to me.
Albert Owen
All the evidence we are hearing from people on the ground to the opposite is completely false, in your opinion.
Mr Swayne
I reject it.
Albert Owen
The Foreign Secretary has a different opinion from you and maybe the Minister would be able to talk a little later.
Mr Ellwood
I think you need to express what the Foreign Secretary’s opinion is, before you take that further.
Albert Owen
Before I do that, on the DFID thing—and I am sure there are questions for you coming up—are you consulted on licences to Saudi Arabia and is there a coherent policy in Government by which you, as a DFID minister or your Secretary of State, comes to a conclusion that this is Government policy and we agree that these export licences go ahead?
Mr Swayne
As the Prime Minister said today, we have the most rigorous export licensing regime in the world. Now, where an export licence concerns a developing country supported by DFID, DFID has a formal role in the determination of that licence. That is not the case in this. There is this notion that somehow the United Kingdom Government consists of branches that do not consult each other. If I have an opinion, I am quite capable of passing it on.
Albert Owen
You are very comfortable with the fact that Saudi Arabia is bombing these areas that we are sending aid to and that those arms are being supplied by the United Kingdom, yes or no?
Mr Swayne
The problem for the delivery of aid in Yemen is that there is a war on. We are not a party to the war. We are the leading advocate of negotiations for an end to that war.
Albert Owen
I am perfectly clear that we are not involved in military action, but we are supplying the Saudis with the armaments that are killing people in this country, to which we are sending in aid for humanitarian reasons.
Mr Swayne
That is an allegation, and all allegations that international law have been breached should be properly investigated, as the Prime Minister said would be done today.
Chair
Minister, you are not suggesting that British arms are not being used by the Saudi‑led coalition, are you?
Mr Swayne
The question was rather more pejoratively put—that British arms were blowing people to smithereens and killing them.
Chair
I think you heard most of the evidence session earlier. All of the witnesses we had said that British arms are being used by the Saudi‑led coalition in Yemen.
Mr Swayne
I do not have the expertise to be able to judge whether they have the expertise to be able to establish that those are facts.
Chair
Considering the number of weapons that were sold just in three months of last year, it would be a bit odd if the Saudis were not using them.
Mr Swayne
These are things that should be properly investigated.
Chair
We will return to that.
Mrs Grant
Can I just come in? Just going back to this aspect of consultation, I can see that this situation does not quite apply in terms of the consolidated criterion 8, where there is an obligation for BIS to consult DFID. Leaving that aside and in view of the sheer number and amount of arms being licensed, going to criteria, and the amount of money and effort that DFID is putting into Yemen, have you been consulted by any other department, be it BIS or the Foreign Office, on the fact that this is happening?
Mr Swayne
I have not been consulted, because I would not expect to be consulted.
Mrs Grant
What about your Secretary of State or the department?
Mr Swayne
Were I to wish to be consulted, I am confident that I could make my opinions known.
Mrs Grant
Has the Secretary of State or any other Minister in the department been consulted?
Mr Swayne
I cannot speak for the Secretary of State. I can only speak for myself.
Albert Owen
You are speaking for the department.
Mr Swayne
I have not been consulted and I would not expect to have been.
Chair
Let me give Mr Ellwood a chance to respond to the question.
Mr Ellwood
Desmond is doing really well.
Chair
We heard this in the previous oral evidence panel and also we have received written evidence on this, so you will be aware that Matrix Chambers has recently published a legal opinion that concludes that the UK Government is breaching national and international law by supplying arms for use by Saudi Arabia in attacks against civilians. Can you tell us what the Government’s assessment of these allegations is and what your response is to that legal opinion?
Mr Ellwood
Firstly, let us take a step back, because we are diving into the weeds here on a specific aspect of what is happening with the munitions. I would say that, if we did not support, on a general basis, the Saudi‑led coalition to legitimately and with UN authority support President Hadi, the consequence of that would be a humanitarian disaster far greater than what has already been articulated by Minister Swayne.
Chair
Are you saying you have no concerns about the tactics that the Saudi‑led coalition is using in Yemen?
Mr Ellwood
Chairman, you are putting words into my mouth there. We have concerns. I returned from Saudi Arabia yesterday morning and we raised a number of issues and encouraged Saudi Arabia to make sure that they follow the same process that we must follow when we are operating in theatres of war. They can legitimately conduct an air campaign but, in the hundreds of sorties that take place every single month, when there are occasions that an incident does take place, it should be investigated appropriately and thoroughly. That is what must happen and that is what we have said to the Saudi Arabians as well. I will make it very clear that this allows us to then be able to look at the equipment that is being used and being sold. As Minister Swayne has already said, we have one of the most robust arms export regimes in the world and we can say that, as the current situation stands, we are satisfied that there has not been a breach of those licences.
Chair
That is your response to the legal opinion from Matrix Chambers.
Mr Ellwood
I have not specifically seen that from Matrix Chambers, but we have to bear in mind the various processes and investigations that need to take place in order for that to happen. Absolutely, I will take a look at that. You also heard the response in Prime Minister’s Questions, as has been mentioned already, regarding making sure that absolutely we consider these. We will look at any aspect of intelligence that comes through. Not to gloss over at all the seriousness of every single allegation and piece of evidence that is put in front of us, which must absolutely be considered, but we are dealing with, on the one side, a Saudi‑led coalition, which if we are honest is not as articulate from a communications perspective as we would like them to be. We want them to be open and transparent about what is going on, and they recognise that. On the flip side, we are dealing with a terrorist organisation from the north, the Houthi regime, which is as good as Daesh, to put it in context, in getting its media out. When for example noise about the Iranian embassy came out across the media, we sent the local employed staff down the road to look at the Iranian embassy to see what exactly had happened. You can imagine the sensitivities just after what had happened at the beginning of the new year between Iran and Saudi Arabia. It turns out that the embassy had not been struck whatsoever. I do not doubt the seriousness of any of the concerns that have been raised, not least with the hits on Médecins Sans Frontières places as well, but the information that needs to be gathered and the intelligence that needs to be placed there for us to be able to recognise the situation is detailed indeed. This is a dynamic war that is now going on, where the Houthis deliberately come in and use hospitals. They deliberately come in and use school locations. They deliberately use those places knowing that there is possible retaliation that they can then film or they can then ensure plays to their hands. We need, and are encouraging Saudi Arabia, to make sure that they are very transparent with their processes, as with that awful incident in Kunduz in northern Afghanistan. A horrific error took place, but the hand must go up when a mistake has been made, so that processes and the conduct of war can be followed.
Chair
Minister, we are talking about something a bit more serious than mistakes being made, in these instances in Yemen. You will have seen the UN Panel of Experts’ report, which has been leaked to the Guardian newspaper. It says, “The panel documented that the coalition had conducted airstrikes targeting civilians and civilian objects, in violation of international humanitarian law, and that these targets included camps for internally displaced persons and refugees, civilian gatherings including weddings, civilian vehicles including buses, residential areas, medical facilities, schools, mosques, markets, factories and food storage warehouses.” It adds that the UN Panel documented 119 coalition sorties relating to violations of international humanitarian law. That is a bit more serious than a mistake, surely.
Mr Ellwood
Again, you are putting words into my mouth. I am not just saying that this is a mistake and we gloss over it.
Chair
You drew a parallel with a US attack in Afghanistan, implying that this could be compared to that.
Mr Ellwood
Firstly, this is a leaked report. I understand that this report is not even officially in the public domain yet. As the Prime Minister said, we will very much look at this report and look at the details of this. Was this mosque occupied at the time and who by? How was it actually being used and why was it then targeted? These are the details that absolutely need to be investigated with a report put in. We would like to see a greater emphasis placed on the method, the approach, in making sure that investigations are concluded as efficiently as possible. We are encouraging and working with the Saudi Arabians on that front. I make it very clear: we do not wish to divert from, dismiss or indeed somehow apologise, in any sense at all, for what is happening there. This is a horrible war and, until the war itself ends, we are not going to get the peace, the ceasefire and the talks in Geneva to commence in the steps that we want in order to provide the environment that will then allow the humanitarian aid that is so desperately needed to come in.
Chair
Thank you, and we will certainly return to those issues of the political process in a moment.
Mrs Grant
With the greatest of respect here, there has been so much talk by the Minister here that I am not sure whether you have answered the question that I am going to ask or not, but I will try to keep it simple. Notwithstanding international legal obligations, consolidated criteria—you have covered that; fine—have you or the Foreign Secretary been consulted by BIS on the extent and detail of the amount of arms that are being sent or licensed to Saudi Arabia and that may be used in Yemen?
Mr Ellwood
Of course we have. To answer your question directly, I am sorry, but you are being naïve if you think that Britain cannot sell weapon systems to allies. We are legitimately allowed to do that. Saudi Arabia is allowed to defend itself. Under the UN Security Council Resolution, the coalition—not just Saudi Arabia, but the Emirates, Jordan and so forth—is allowed to participate in a coalition to support the legitimate Government of Yemen. We must not forget that. Yes, there are details in the manner in which this war is being conducted that we must scrutinise. I do not doubt that at all, but the right for Saudi Arabia and other countries to come to the defence of Yemen we very much support. Therefore, of course we are aware.
Mrs Grant
Minister, can I just interject? Are you aware that, in the three months between July and September, £1 billion worth of licences were granted to sell arms to Saudi Arabia?
Mr Ellwood
I am not sure where you are taking this. Of course we are aware.
Mrs Grant
You said you were aware. Were you aware of that fact—three months, £1 billion?
Mr Ellwood
We are aware right across the board. We do not just accidentally sell these things on eBay and suddenly it comes up that there is a sale or not. Every single arms sale across the world is scrutinised—every single arms sale—no matter what it is, whether it be a paperweight or a Typhoon, whether it be a Hellfire missile or indeed a Chinook. Every nut and bolt is scrutinised, and comes across my desk and indeed the Foreign Secretary’s desk and through BIS as well. Of course we are aware, but as to making some judgment about the scale of what is being sold and questioning that, it is how the equipment is used that is the question, not so much the amount that has been sold.
Chair
Exactly, and on that arms trade law is very clear that it is not allowed to transfer weapons if there is a clear risk of violations of international humanitarian law. Every time it comes back to this issue, where the overwhelming evidence that has been taken by this Committee is that there is that violation being committed by the Saudi‑led forces, with weapons including those supplied by the United Kingdom. Therefore, there is a serious question about whether we are in breach.
Mr Ellwood
On the number of cases that we have been made aware of through the media, and indeed some NGOs have provided information and so forth as well, we have encouraged and indeed made sure that Saudi Arabians are aware of the process that they must follow to do their investigations, along with the Yemeni authorities, to describe exactly what happened in this case. I have to say, as I said before, there are many cases, and I have seen the evidence, where it has been an artillery shell that has caused the damage, not an aircraft. That artillery shell could have come from anywhere, including from the Houthis themselves. The level of scrutiny of intelligence that we get here is very important to make sure that it is accurate. That is what we must confirm ourselves, before we then say that there has been a breach of this, that or the other.
Albert Owen
We are not making judgments at this moment in time, Minister. We are asking questions and taking evidence, and we are taking evidence from a wide range of bodies, including the international humanitarian community. We are not making judgments; we are asking these very important questions. Both you and Minister Swayne were in agreement that we need to investigate, and I am quoting you, Mr Swayne: “We need to investigate these things properly and ensure that they are properly investigated.” That is what we are doing; that is what we are trying to resolve. You will be aware that Britain and the US blocked a draft resolution tabled by the Government of Netherlands in the Human Rights Council. We were in Brussels yesterday and spoke to some colleagues there, and to Save the Children and others. Why then, if we want to get to the bottom of this, is the United Kingdom blocking an investigation that would be independent and come to their own conclusions and report on the violations of international humanitarian law in Yemen? Why, on the one hand, are you calling for this independent inquiry and, on the other hand, blocking it?
Mr Ellwood
Let me just answer the piece on the Human Rights Council. It was not the case of supporting one text or another. What resulted were in fact negotiations that took place, and there was an agreement that was reached on a single text that we then supported. That text makes very clear that the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights will work with the Government of Yemen on this process. It was not the case that there was no consensus; there was consensus reached on this and we supported that.
Albert Owen
It is just the wording on the resolution that you had difficulty supporting. Is that what you are saying?
Mr Ellwood
I am saying that we ended up with a consensus, which is what you need in these situations.
Albert Owen
What is the consensus? What is going to come out of this motion?
Mr Ellwood
The Dutch voted for it. This allows the actual Office of the High Commissioner, along with Yemen, to move this forward.
Nicholas Alton
The High Commissioner will make a report on his conclusions at the next Human Rights Council session in March.
Albert Owen
Britain wants to have an independent inquiry into this, yes or no?
Mr Ellwood
As I say, we have agreed this text. We have agreed the process that that should be.
Albert Owen
You have an advantage over me; I have not read the text. I am asking a simple question: do you as the UK Government support an independent inquiry into these allegations?
Mr Ellwood
We currently support what has been agreed.
Chair
Are you confident that it is independent, when one of the parties of the investigation is the one against which there are allegations, i.e. the Government of Yemen? This is an independent investigation being conducted, I think you said, with the Government of Yemen.
Mr Ellwood
This is following standard protocols. This is what happens in other theatres as well. As I say, this has been agreed and this is what we then support.
Albert Owen
The Dutch one you threw out. Why? Why did you not agree with the Dutch draft resolutions?
Mr Ellwood
It was not thrown out. I am repeating myself now.
Albert Owen
You are repeating yourself, but you have just responded to the Chair.
Mr Ellwood
We ended up with a consensus that then involves the combined work of the High Commissioner, as well as the Government of Yemen. It must include the Government of Yemen. It is absolutely important that that happens.
Nicholas Alton
The Dutch were one of the ones that signed up to that consensus resolution in the end, through a process of negotiation. The Dutch were part of that consensus.
Albert Owen
You are happy with its independence, even though Yemen is on it.
Mr Ellwood
We are content with the result, yes.
Albert Owen
They could give evidence, could they not? They do not have to sit on it and come up with and help draft a report.
Mr Ellwood
As I say, we are content with the status quo.
Chair
Albert mentioned that the Committee had been in Brussels this week visiting European institutions. We were told that there is still discussion going on, on achieving a common European position. The suggestion that was put to us was that the UK and France are in a minority of two in preventing a strongly worded common European position. Are you able to tell the Committee about that?
Mr Ellwood
This is an EU position.
Chair
Yes.
Mr Ellwood
I am afraid I am not privy to those particular discussions.
Chair
If you cannot, could the Minister for Europe write to us on that after the Committee?
Mr Ellwood
Absolutely, he can do. From a British perspective, I have been leading on this. I have conversations with President Hadi on a regular basis and indeed with other players from this perspective. We helped fund the UN envoy’s work as well, in order to bring those various parties together. I use this opportunity, if I may, just to explain the complexity of the country that we are dealing with. It is not simply President Hadi supported by the coalition against the Houthis themselves. It is far more complicated than that, with the number of tribes that you have in the country—the Bakil, the Hashid tribe and Khawlan tribes. Underneath that, there are over 100 different sub‑tribes, each with their own loyalties as well. Indeed, looking back at the history itself, the sense of nation state has been absent. There has never really been a sense of nation state, even going back into the Ottoman times, when we used the port of Aden on our way to supply India. We need to look at this in this context and recognise that, if you go to the port of Mukalla in the east, it is solely run by al‑Qaeda, and Daesh has now moved into the areas around the conurbation of the port of Aden. The Governor of Aden was killed not by Houthis but by another terrorist operation that is taking advantage of the vacuum of power in order for that franchise to develop in that area as well. That is the complex nature in which we find ourselves. As I say, it is not simply what is a minority of the population that has moved in from the northwest, over Sana’a, and is pushing down, causing horrific forms of humanitarian catastrophe. It is a wider challenge that we face.
Wendy Morton
Moving on a little bit, this is a question for Minister Swayne. Early on during this evidence session, you set out what you saw as the priorities for DFID, and one of those was the peace process. Clearly it is a top strategic priority: supporting political talks to return to an inclusive political process. What does this mean in practice?
Mr Swayne
In practice, it has meant providing officials as support when talks take place. It includes ensuring that delegations reflect the presence of non‑elites and particularly women. It involves a huge amount of diplomacy, simply in urging the combatants to engage in a peace process when they still believe that they might win it on the battlefield. Is there anything else that I should add in terms of the logistics of what supporting a peace process means?
Juliette John
The only final thing I would add is that we are funding the UN special envoy’s office, through the cross‑Whitehall Conflict, Stability and Security Fund, with technical expertise on particular subjects, so we are also supportive financially.
Wendy Morton
Just following on from that, alongside that, are you working with the FCO in terms of diplomacy or do you leave diplomacy entirely to the FCO?
Mr Swayne
No, absolutely not. It is one Her Majesty’s Government. If a Minister is going to Saudi, Kuwait or the UAE, I of course make the case for them to have a greater provision of aid but, equally, I make the diplomatic points about the need to engage in the peace process. I make the diplomatic points about the need to observe international law and for greater access, in exactly the way that I expect Mr Ellwood, when he makes his diplomatic pitch, to speak on aid matters and demand a greater contribution.
Wendy Morton
That leads me on to Minister Ellwood. Do you wish to add anything to that?
Mr Ellwood
No, my honourable friend has summed things up perfectly. There is not a division between the two. We work extremely closely. Mr Swayne is my neighbour down in Dorset way and we are able to speak about these matters. We began, as has been mentioned by a number of people, about this thing labelled as a forgotten war. This is a tragedy; there is no doubt about it, but I underline and repeat what Mr Swayne has said—that we, as Britain, and indeed our allies if we encourage them, will do everything we can to make sure what is happening here is recognised. This is not just from a humanitarian perspective. Those trained for the Charlie Hebdo attack, I understand, came from Yemen. Those in the printer cartridge attack that was going to take place on one of the airlines came from Yemen. There are a series of attacks that have taken place from al‑Qaeda based in Yemen. They are the most well-organised and well-funded parts of al‑Qaeda, and that is glossed over in all these discussions, because of the wider challenges that we face. Yes, we have this big conference on Syria that is taking place and that is all good news. There is work that you are doing here and I can absolutely emphasise that there is work that we are doing behind the scenes. At the UN General Assembly, I chaired the Friends of Yemen meeting, which we co‑chair with the Saudi Arabians, to make sure that people do not forget what is actually going on here. We do that at our peril, because this will be the crisis that haunts us. More people will then bleed into extremism, because they have given up on the West helping to secure peace and proper governance.
Mrs Grant
What has been the impact of the crisis on women and girls?
Mr Swayne
Women and girls tend to suffer rather more on the front line, because of their lack of a more obvious voice. We have already heard of the circumstances for children, the extent of malnutrition and the lack of education. That is why we have made a point of ensuring that the voices of women are represented on delegations. We have put significant effort into that. What more can I say about the specific effort to address the needs of women and girls?
Juliette John
Through all our programmes there is a specific focus on showing that the different needs of men, women, boys and girls are addressed. For example, we are specifically supporting pregnant women and lactating mothers through our nutrition programme. As the Minister says, women and girls have been worst affected.
Mrs Grant
I know that DFID has done some excellent work all around the world, in relation to women and girls. It is a matter very close to the heart of the Secretary of State, but what is your view of what role they could play, in terms of finding some sort of sustainable peace in this very difficult area?
Mr Swayne
That is the importance of getting them represented in peace negotiations and as part of delegations. The fact is that instances of violence against women have increased and the situation is clearly undesirable. Strangely enough, even among the centrally managed programmes, Marie Stopes is still providing family planning and maternity healthcare services in Yemen.
Albert Owen
Minister, you mentioned earlier on the money that is being given to Yemen to help it out. The UK has a good record. Between 2011 and 2014, almost £250 million was spent on reconstruction, and political and economic reforms. Now that we have this catastrophe, post the conflict, are you confident that we can refocus on the economic and political reforms that the Government set out on in 2011 to 2014, and will there be extra resources to do that?
Mr Swayne
We clearly had to refocus. A huge amount of effort had been put into technical assistance to financial ministries and the banks, and a political outreach. That will basically have to start again, although we have continued to concentrate on at a political level the preservation of institutions like the Bank of Yemen, and ensuring that banking services are still available in Yemen, and indeed the preservation of the Social Fund for Development. The continuation of these institutions is vital for the reconstruction effort. We begin the focus on reconstruction and recovery in the meetings that we have already organised with the Government of Yemen, the donor community and others, beginning next month. Am I confident that there will be sufficient resources to rebuild Yemen? It depends very much on the state that we find it in afterwards. These things generally take, after a war of this sort, about 30 years.
Albert Owen
I appreciate that. I am saying that the whole focus is not just on humanitarian. You do have a long‑term plan for the economy.
Mr Swayne
We have to develop a long‑term plan. The lessons are clearly that the earlier you do that, the better. We have focused on life preservation. We need to start refocusing on education. We have done quite a bit of education. I think 240,000 children have been put in schools through the Social Development Fund, and we have some work at the moment on rebuilding schools and getting children back into schools, but it is very much niche. The main effort has been nutrition, water, food and medical supplies, and you are quite right; we have to refocus.
Mr Ellwood
If I may add to that, in my talks in meeting some of the Yemeni Ministers in Riyadh a couple of days ago, we discussed what the big‑ticket event is that could assist the country. There is no doubt, speaking on the logistical distribution of humanitarian aid, it cannot all go through the port of Aden. It takes too long to get up through the mountains and across the terrain, so the port of Hudaydah is absolutely critical, not just for humanitarian support coming in. Cranes have been damaged there, but still not enough ships are being allowed entry, despite the UN monitoring an approval scheme. Also what was made clear to me, as much as we do not see Yemen as an oil exporter—in fact it is a net importer of fuel, per se—there is an ability and the pipes are still working, I understand, to export oil and gas should the port of Hudaydah be reopened. That will be helpful on two fronts. Firstly, it gives a sense of pride and a sense of direction that, yes, things are heading in the right way and that economically they can become more stable, but it also allows the funding to be able to come in as well. It will be crude oil that will go out—that could be exported. I emphasised this in all the conversations I had with the Saudi Arabians to say that this needs to be a priority. The liberation of this port area, however that is done, whether it is through agreements or a local ceasefire, is critical from the humanitarian and the economic sides.
Albert Owen
On that, you spoke about your discussions with Saudi about the current situation. Post conflict, are you also talking to the Gulf states that are our allies in the region about reconstruction?
Mr Ellwood
There are talks taking place and there will be a huge amount of effort by the GCC nations to look at what can be done. We have been doing some private discussions and calculations of what needs to be done. It is difficult because, when you go back to the national dialogue agreement, there was a structure there for a six‑province setup. The Houthis designed it and of course they then breached that. Much of this hinges on the forthcoming Geneva talks, which I hope will then be the parameters, the building blocks. Absolutely, once the governance structures are then agreed, the stabilisation can come in. That window is small, as we know. Unless you get in and provide that support to the actual populations, they themselves will lose faith, and that is where extremists can then come in and recruit.
Fiona Bruce
Thank you very much, Minister. Turning back to Minister Swayne on that very point, what is the UK Government doing or what can the UK Government do to support the private sector in Yemen? We heard from the diaspora last week it has virtually ground to a halt. Over 70% of companies shut down. A similar number of employees are now out of work and there is a risk of young people in particular being attracted to extremist groups, Daesh and al‑Qaeda, simply to bring some money into their family homes. Can anything be done at all?
Mr Swayne
Yes, it is an enormous problem. The economy shrunk, according to the IMF and the World Bank, by 28.9% last year. It is important that markets work for there to be a private sector. Returning to earlier conversations we have had with this Committee, cash in people’s pockets is important in getting those markets and the private sector working. Also, I believe that the Social Fund for Development, which we support, is critical in this process in providing large‑scale public works jobs. Last year, they provided 500,000 man-days of those jobs, with our support. Their target for the next two years is 2 million man-days, again in public works jobs, which will give people something to do. It will put money in their pockets, which will have knock‑on effects for the private sector. Another key deliverable for the private sector is that the banking system survives. We are working with the British Bankers’ Association and an organisation that rejoices in the title the Action Group on Cross Border Remittances to ensure that continues. Regional banks and international banks are still operating, particularly Chinese, but all these things are important for the survival of a functioning private sector.
Fiona Bruce
May I turn back to the question I touched on earlier? The UN representative here earlier this afternoon said in evidence, “Without DFID’s help, we would not have been able to supply the assistance we have to date.” He acknowledged, as I think the Committee does, that DFID’s work in Yemen is certainly among the most generous globally, but it is still only £85 million compared with £1.1 billion in Syria. Minister, you have said in previous debates in Westminster Hall that the reason has been the inability to deliver that aid in Yemen. Would you at least agree to this Committee today to have a look at the evidence we received earlier from the UN representative, which your official said was one of your chief contact points in the region? In light of the fact he is saying that access is possible, could you revisit the aid the UK is providing into Yemen?
Mr Swayne
We revisited it only in the last couple of days with a further £10 million. The United Kingdom did not come to this recently. We have been in Yemen for the long term and before this crisis, and we did expect, given their level of poverty, to be expending money there. However, we never expected to be spending such vast sums of money in the rest of the region. We are now spending huge sums in what were middle‑income countries, which we never expected. That places an enormous strain on the development budget, notwithstanding that it is a growing development budget. Yes, of course I want to spend more to provide more relief in Yemen in a desperate situation, which is a Level 3 emergency, but I do not have a bottomless bag.
Fiona Bruce
We absolutely accept that but, if I am right in quoting another witness from this afternoon, they said that this is currently the largest humanitarian crisis globally, with up to 22 million people facing potentially serious food shortages. Minister Ellwood put it very well, when he said that we do not want to look back in the future and say that we missed this.
Mr Swayne
I agree, but I am not going to get into the misery Olympics of whether it is worse in Syria in Madaya, or in Taiz, and all the rest. It is all pretty awful.
Fiona Bruce
Absolutely, but all I am asking, Minister, is if greater access is possible than perhaps has been appreciated to date, would you revisit this?
Mr Swayne
We will certainly, and we will certainly ensure that we get others to raise their game as well. It is not always a question of what more Britain can do; it is often a question of what more Britain can do to get other people to do things. The Secretary of State was so successful in her meeting at UNGA at September, when she managed to get another £85 million. Given that we are spending £85 million, it is effectively doubling the pot by getting others to contribute.
Wendy Morton
Just to come back on that very last point, what more can the UK Government realistically do to encourage more of the international community to do more in Yemen? There is a limit to what each country can do. You gave us one example.
Mr Swayne
The agenda that we launch next month with a series of meetings on the reconstruction of Yemen will start to focus the mind. Later this year, there will inevitably have to be some replenishing of the UN appeal, and we will be announcing our own expenditure for the forward years. All this will provide opportunities for us to bang on the table and say, “Right, this is what we’re doing. What are you offering?”
Chair
We have five more minutes and I want to take us back to the earlier discussion on the Human Rights Council and put a further question to Minister Ellwood. The evidence we took from Oxfam was that, when the Dutch draft was replaced, as we discussed earlier, with a Saudi‑sponsored text, there was no reference to an independent international fact‑finding mission in the new text. The panel that we heard from earlier told us unanimously that they felt there was a real need for an independent investigation. Is it the British Government’s view that they are simply wrong or is it the British Government’s view that what we have is an independent investigation?
Mr Ellwood
Nicholas may want to add something to that. I can only repeat what I said before—that a consensus text was agreed, which states very clearly where the High Commissioner would work in relation to Yemen.
Chair
It was to support a process that had already started, under the auspices of the Yemeni Government, as I understand it.
Mr Ellwood
Yes, and at the heart of this is the fact that there are some events that have taken place, which are in the public domain, that need to be looked at. We need to ensure that process is in place. One of the reasons I went to Saudi Arabia was to ensure that, whenever an incident takes place, we follow the normal protocols that we followed and continue to follow elsewhere as well. If those systems are not robust enough—if they are deemed not to be appropriate—then, yes, you can look at other aspects, in the way that you can realise the same information. From where we stand at the moment, first on the export licensing systems and the robust nature in which we scrutinise how these weapons systems are utilised and in what context, we are content at this stage. Do you want to add something?
Nicholas Alton
Our push has been to work with the Saudis, for example, for them to conduct thorough and conclusive investigations into these incidents. For example, they announced an investigation into an incident in December on a MSF building in Taiz.
Chair
It is quite hard to argue it is an independent investigation into Saudi abuses if it is the Saudis doing it.
Nicholas Alton
We would say that, whether it is independent or not, the most effective way of conducting these kinds of investigations, we believe, is for the Saudis to start that process themselves.
Chair
It is not independent. Let us be honest; it is not independent. The position of the panel earlier that there should be an independent one is one the British Government reject.
Mr Ellwood
Again, we are going around in circles on this particular one. We look at all the evidence that comes into us. We made it very clear that we share this with the Saudi Arabians. We want them to have the robust processes that are in place.
Chair
Are you confident they have got those robust processes in place?
Mr Ellwood
The trouble is the lexicon that is being used now. I made it clear; I used the Iranian embassy incident of one example of a breach of human rights and so forth that turned out not to be the case. On this side of any answers or any reports that come out from any investigations, we need to be clear that we encourage these investigations to take place, but we cannot label them from a legal perspective with the language that you are using.
Albert Owen
I do not mean to go around in circles. I am just not clear. We were told in Brussels that the Dutch had put forward a motion for an international independent inquiry. Both of you then said in your responses that the Dutch now agree to a Saudi version of that. Is that what you are saying?
Mr Ellwood
Is it a general inquiry that you are now seeking yourselves?
Albert Owen
It is not us; the international community and the Dutch had put forward the idea of having an independent international inquiry into potential violations in Yemen, predominantly by the Saudis. There was a Saudi version that you have talked about. Are you now saying that the Dutch agreed to the Saudis leading on this?
Mr Ellwood
I do not know the details of the particular thing. I can certainly look into it and write to you.
Albert Owen
It would be useful.
Mr Ellwood
The position we are in is that we want every single incident to be investigated thoroughly and for information to be shared. When mistakes or errors have been made, or it is deemed that an attack has taken place, in a dynamic situation, that has led to collateral damage, we want that process to be followed.
Albert Owen
I understand what you want, but the international community wants something more than that. It wants an independent inquiry into it. The Dutch were leading on it and you said you had a counter‑proposal to the Dutch, which they have now agreed to. That was my understanding.
Nicholas Alton
In the September Human Rights Council, there was a discussion that went on and, in the end, a single text was agreed by all parties, including the Dutch and others.
Mr Ellwood
They signed up to it.
Albert Owen
Why has this just come to our attention, Chair? I thought it was more recent than that.
Chair
They said this when we were in Brussels yesterday. It was last September.
Nicholas Alton
Last September was the process of a Yemeni‑led investigation supported by assistance from the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights, and they will report back in March with their findings.
Chair
Clearly that is different from what the Dutch originally proposed and, in the nature of the diplomacy of these sorts of events, presumably the Dutch fell in behind an alternative because they did not have the numbers to get their more far‑reaching proposal through. It clearly is not an independent inquiry, is it?
Nicholas Alton
That was the process that was agreed by the end of that session.
Chair
It is clearly not an independent inquiry, is it?
Mr Ellwood
We are satisfied with the consensus that was reached, and that is important.
Chair
On that rather unsatisfactory note, we have run out of time, but thank you very much indeed for your evidence to us today. Thank you, Ministers. Thank you to the officials as well. Oral evidence: Crisis in Yemen, HC 532 21