← Back to Westminster Hall Debates
India’s Foreign Contribution Law: NGOs
25 May 2022
Lead MP
Stephen Timms
East Ham
Lab
Responding Minister
Amanda Milling
Tags
EconomyEmploymentBrexitBusiness & Trade
Word Count: 3407
Other Contributors: 2
At a Glance
Stephen Timms raised concerns about india’s foreign contribution law: ngos in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.
Key Requests to Government:
I ask the Minister to urge the Indian authorities to review carefully the FCRA for compliance with international human rights standards and to suspend aspects of the law that restrict charities from providing urgently needed relief. I also request an explanation from the Indian Government as to why Oxfam India's activities are considered 'not in the public interest'.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
I am concerned about the impact of India's Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) on non-governmental organisations (NGOs). Oxfam India, which received around €15 million in annual income from abroad last year, has had its FCRA licence refused and will see its annual income fall to €2.1 million this year. This decision is expected to close at least 11 of its 15 development projects and drastically reduce the organisation's reach of over 1.5 million people, mainly Dalits, indigenous populations, minorities, women, and girls. No explanation has been given for this decision. The FCRA now gives the Government huge powers to inquire into NGOs' activities, suspending their work until inquiries are complete.
Afzal Khan
Lab
Manchester Rusholme
Stunned that Amnesty was forced to close its office in India. Points out the ongoing conflict in Kashmir and the farmers' protest, highlighting the lack of freedom of expression and persecution of minorities. The Member for Manchester, Gorton mentioned Amnesty International being forced to end its covid support due to difficulties in accepting foreign aid under India's Foreign Contribution Regulation Act. Emphasised the importance of the UK-India relationship but questioned why leaders advocating freedom were given life sentences in India, urging the government to encourage India to comply with UN resolutions.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Congratulations Derek Twigg on securing the debate. Mentions that organisations such as Oxfam, Greenpeace and Compassion are affected by India's Foreign Contribution Law, suggesting this is an early warning of increased human rights abuses in India. In an intervention, the hon. Member for Strangford highlighted that Mother Teresa's Missionaries of Charity were blocked from accessing international funding on the grounds of 'adverse inputs'. He pointed out that 12,580 NGOs had their licences revoked and questioned whether the Minister has overseen this number of organisations. He also mentioned a programme to address those affected.
Government Response
Amanda Milling
Government Response
The Government believes a vibrant civil society is central to democracy, supporting NGOs globally. The FCRA regulates foreign funding for NGOs in India since 1976. Since its amendment in 2020, some NGOs have faced challenges renewing their licences. Missionaries of Charity succeeded in restoring registration, but others did not. The UK continues to monitor developments and raise concerns with the Indian Government through diplomatic channels. Specific cases like Oxfam India and Amnesty International India are discussed at ministerial levels. Financial regulations and security legislation impact some NGOs negatively. India's 1.6 million diaspora community strengthens bilateral relations. Progress on the comprehensive strategic partnership includes trade deals, job creation, and climate action. The Government remains committed to speaking frankly about issues with India while supporting regional and global security.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About Westminster Hall Debates
Westminster Hall debates are a chance for MPs to raise important issues affecting their constituents and get a response from a government minister. Unlike Prime Minister's Questions, these debates are more in-depth and collaborative. The MP who secured the debate speaks first, other MPs can contribute, and a minister responds with the government's position.