To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they will take to promote a resumption of direct talks between Palestinian representatives and Israel to seek a full agreement.

My Lords, my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary is in regular contact with Israeli and Arab partners making clear the need for the parties to resume negotiations as soon as possible. He reiterated the priority that he attaches to peace in the Middle East during his meeting with his counterpart Mr Lieberman on 22 February and in his conversation with Prime Minister Salam Fayyad on 23 February.

Is it not a growing tragedy that the ridiculous antics of the Netanyahu Administration are having the effect of making an excellent country, Israel, almost as unpopular as apartheid South Africa, much to the detriment of millions of its decent citizens who want a peaceful settlement? Does the Minister agree that this farce cannot continue? When will the EU insist on the reversal of recent settlements and on real, proper negotiations, not ones in which the Israelis pretend as they have done in the past?

My Lords, I sense the frustration in the noble Lord’s question, which I am sure is shared in many parts of the House. There is no shortage of hard words about all the parties involved in what we hope is a move towards negotiations for peace in that part of the world, so I should not add to them. Suffice it to say that we continue to believe as a Government—and this thought is held more broadly in Europe—that sharing a full and frank dialogue with the partners in Israel and Palestine is the best way to bring forward what at the end of the day is the only solution, which is a move towards negotiations. While the frustration continues and this question continues to be asked—it is only a week since I replied to a similar Question and one can appreciate the frustration—at the end of the day perseverance will be the answer.

Does the Minister realise that the ability of this Government to influence any action by the Israeli Government is greatly undermined by, first, the threats to Israeli politicians who might visit this country and, secondly, the rising tide of anti-Semitic incidents, which tend to be connected with events in Israel, so that the relationship is seen as hostile? What does the Minister propose to do to change this situation?

The short answer to the noble Baroness is that the Government do all in their power to seek to influence. If people refuse to be influenced, that is indeed a difficulty. We are candid—some would say critical—friends of Israel and Palestine. We do not abandon that friendship, but neither should we abandon the candid and critical views that we have. For example, we hold to the view that settlements are illegal and a barrier to moving towards peace. That is not a view that we should change simply because the parties involved do not accept it.

My Lords, can my noble friend identify one single benefit to the Palestinian people in the past 43 years since 1967 that has arisen out of the diplomacy to which he referred and to which David Miliband referred yesterday?

I note my noble friend’s comments. A week ago his advice was to break the blockade, but I think that his advice is fairly nihilist on this occasion. We cannot allow our frustration at the parties to lead us to abandon the only course. The two-country solution is the only viable one. I understand the frustration of my noble friend and others, but our abandoning the field and leaving it to others would not bring that date nearer; it would push it further away.

Will the Minister spell out the achievements of Mr Tony Blair as head of the Middle East quartet?

Oh!

I do not find too much amusement in the situation in the Middle East. It is a tragic situation in which all the parties are trying to do their best. That includes Mr Blair, who has made a significant contribution to those aims through his work as a quartet representative, as evidenced by the quartet’s continued confidence in him. We welcome the achievements of the quartet’s representatives and their efforts to bring about transformative change in the occupied Palestinian territories. Most important, we will continue to support those efforts rather than scoff at them.

My Lords, is it not essential that talks should take place without preconditions as soon as possible? It does no good at all to have both sides hurling allegations around. Do the Government support the view of Senator George Mitchell and the European Union that talks are essential and that we are losing valuable time by not having them?

I can both assure my noble friend and assist the House with a very short answer: we agree entirely with that point of view.

My Lords, the Question was about British policy on Israel and Palestine, which on the whole has been to follow the American lead, recognising that the United States has the greatest influence over what happens there, particularly in Israel. Now that it seems that the Obama Administration’s efforts to relaunch talks with Israel and Palestine have been blocked by domestic opposition within the United States, should not Britain be pushing with our European partners for the EU to play a more active role in getting talks started again between the two sides?

My Lords, I do not see the two things as alternatives. I believe that President Obama’s Administration continue in their endeavours, in which we share as Europeans and as Great Britain. Therefore, I think that this is a false prospectus. We should indeed put all our efforts behind the EU and the United States and make our own individual efforts to bring peace to the area. Looking for division is a diversion.

My Lords, does the Minister not agree that we need to give some traction to our diplomatic efforts by working with our European partners to bring effective pressure to bear on Israel?

Effective pressure comes in many ways. The Goldstone report, which has featured in previous Questions, is a case in point. The resolution carried in the General Assembly on 26 February revealed changes in patterns of voting. The United Kingdom was able to vote with the majority to call for what we have been calling for for some time: a full, credible and impartial investigation into all the allegations made by the Goldstone committee. The vote in favour was substantial: there were 91 votes in favour and seven against, with 31 abstentions. That is European unity at its best but also a recognition that the Palestinian delegation had moderated its text and had taken into account the concerns that we raised. Now we want to see those who are independent, on both sides, produce a clear picture of what happened as a way of moving forward.