Commons Sense

House of Commons · Westminster Hall

Integrated Activity Fund: Transparency

22 October 2020 · 7 other contributors · 10,411 words

Opened by David Linden SNP Glasgow East

Responding minister: James Cleverly

Foreign AffairsBusiness & Trade

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

David Linden raised concerns about integrated activity fund: transparency in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.

Key points

  • The Government has spent up to 20 million annually through the Integrated Activity Fund for five years.
  • The Minister acknowledged criticism and emphasized the fund's role in economic stability and trade.
  • The Minister assured that the fund has evolved into the Gulf strategy fund with enhanced governance measures.

Key requests to Government

I ask the Government to publish the results of any risk assessments undertaken regarding human rights abuses and to disclose beneficiaries or implementers of the Integrated Activity Fund, as well as specific details on projects funded by it. The Government should be transparent about how their money is being spent across the region. The Member requests a review of whether this fund is an appropriate use of taxpayers' money due to its secretive nature and lack of impact on improving human rights conditions in recipient countries.

How the debate unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.

Opened the debate

David Linden SNP Glasgow East

The Integrated Activity Fund is a fund of up to £20 million each year, but the Government has failed to provide a breakdown of spending in each country. The lack of transparency is concerning given that the region includes countries accused of human rights abuses such as Saudi Arabia and Bahrain. Human rights groups have raised concerns about the legitimacy of this fund. Inquiries into projects supported by the IAF are met with vague answers, indicating a need for clearer communication from the Government. The Member is concerned about the lack of transparency regarding the Integrated Activity Fund, which has been spending around £20 million a year for five years. He questions why the Government funds activities in countries like Abu Dhabi and Saudi Arabia, where human rights conditions are deteriorating. The Member points out that about one-third of projects could be described as 'justice projects,' including security and imprisonment issues, but there is inadequate information on how much each UK Department spends or on which projects. He highlights worsening human rights records in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, with the latter executing 184 people through horrific methods.

Other contributors (7)
  • Alistair Carmichael Lib Dem Orkney and Shetland

    The hon. Gentleman is setting up the debate nicely here, but may I suggest that it might be helpful to go back to first principles and ask ourselves whether, in the areas he has just outlined, the need for any reform within the Gulf Co-operation Council countries may not necessarily be rooted in lack of money? Struggles with the idea that deficiencies in governance, human rights, and agriculture can be solved by funding alone. Emphasises the need for humility when engaging with Gulf countries, highlighting both progress and areas needing improvement. Raises concerns about transparency and accountability within the Integrated Activity Fund (IAF), citing examples like the Dubai police chief's candidacy for Interpol presidency and the treatment of British academic Matthew Hedges in UAE. Criticises double standards in UK engagement with Saudi Arabia despite its poor human rights record. Mr Alistair Carmichael asked why examples of funding allocations can be discussed in some cases but not all, emphasising the need for full disclosure of fund usage.

  • Brendan O'Hara SNP Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber

    The MP emphasised the need for greater transparency regarding the Integrated Activity Fund (IAF), expressing concern that the Government's lack of disclosure about how the IAF is used undermines democratic scrutiny. He highlighted the fund's secretive nature as contradictory to an ethical foreign policy and cited human rights abuses in Gulf states funded by the UK. Mr Brendan O'Hara responded to the Minister's comment about transparency and accountability in diplomacy. He suggested that regular debates like this one are essential for addressing concerns regarding transparency. Reiterating his earlier point, Mr Brendan O'Hara argued that debates on this issue should happen more frequently than every 18 months to ensure better transparency.

  • Jim Shannon DUP Strangford

    Shannon expressed concern over the lack of transparency in UK funding to conflict zones, especially regarding the Palestinian Authority and Bahrain. He highlighted examples where IAF funds might be supporting religious discrimination and political prisoner mistreatment in Bahrain. Shannon called for an independent review of the IAF's impact on human rights abuses before further funding is provided. Mr Jim Shannon acknowledged the Government's work but questioned its effectiveness in addressing human rights abuses, suggesting a need for different approaches.

  • Laurence Robertson Con Hendon

    We now come to the Front-Bench speeches. Please remember that we need to leave two minutes at the end for Mr Linden to wind up.

  • Peter Bottomley Con Worthing West

    Mr Bottomley expressed concerns about the lack of transparency in the Government's spending on the Integrated Activity Fund, questioning why information is not provided and how MPs can judge its effectiveness without knowing expenditure details. He highlighted that only two-thirds of the allocated £20 million annually has been spent on average and advocated for greater transparency to support proper use of public money. The fund is not part of the UK's aid budget; it is overseas spending.

  • Peter Bottomley Con Worthing West

    The Member asks why we are supporting organisations like the special investigations unit in Bahrain, which provide a shield against proper investigation despite receiving UK funding. He highlights the effectiveness of these funds and their impact on human rights conditions.

  • Wayne David Lab Caerphilly

    Mr Wayne David highlighted the lack of transparency and information available about how funds from the Integrated Activity Fund are allocated, questioning why risk assessments were not conducted despite their importance. He emphasised that there is a widespread concern about human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, with public money being used potentially ineffectively. Asked the Minister to provide a comprehensive list of all projects funded by the Integrated Activity Fund.

Government Response

James Cleverly

The Minister acknowledged criticism of the Integrated Activity Fund, emphasizing its role in enhancing economic stability, trade opportunities, and technical assistance for institutional reforms. He highlighted specific projects such as funding a digital skills hub in Oman and securing export contracts worth £80 million through a trade mission to Saudi Arabia. The Minister assured that the fund has evolved into the Gulf strategy fund with enhanced governance measures and will publish a summary of its 2021 work for scrutiny.

▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy