Debate contribution: End Israeli Impunity in Gaza

Debate contribution by Mr Robbie Butler on 24 June 2025.

MLA

Mr Robbie Butler

Party at the time

Ulster Unionist Party

Date

24 June 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

End Israeli Impunity in Gaza

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5047737

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you so much, Mr Speaker. I will whizz through my speech and then address some of the points that were made. It was important for us to offer an amendment today, because the sense that I get from the motion and from the Member for West Belfast who has just spoken — he talked about divesting from Israel — is that some people would divest Israel from the river to the sea. This is not about Israel's actions since Hamas's attack on 7 October. Those people would divest from Israel regardless of Israel's actions. Our amendment, however, calls out Israel. It deplores some of the actions that Israel has taken, and I will get to that. We needed to table the amendment, because the motion needed balance. Our amendment, unlike the motion, affirms that every child, whether they are Israeli or Palestinian, is of equal value. If anyone suggests that they are not supporting it because the word "genocide" is missing, they will be hit back with the fact that they do not see every child as having equal value. That is what they will not be supporting if they do not support our amendment. The motion includes really important elements, and I agree with much of it — the call for a ceasefire, the demand for humanitarian aid and the emphasis on human rights — but it also presents a partial account of a deeply complex situation. We have a deeply complex situation. It is incredibly complex. It is often referred to in this place, and some of us do not even understand it. Minister, you are just in, and you are making noises. You have missed most of the debate. Please do not make noises when you were not here for the debate.

No. If you do not mind, I will try to use my time.

Very briefly.

I will accept that from the Speaker. To be honest, however, I would not mind chuntering from someone who was in the Chamber about something that was said before. I will give way to the Member from Upper Bann.

I really appreciate that. The Member has made a really good point. There was a point in the debate where we talked about the Alliance Party and the SDLP calling out Hamas in previous motions. A quick check, however, revealed that those motions were never just about single issues: there was always a bit of balance. That is what we sought to do today.

There is always a but. The Member from North Antrim, who is not here now, also talked about the "but", but introduced the "but", because there is nuance and there is a story behind the story. We have to be absolutely clear here. There were acts of terror on 7 October 2023. Hamas, backed by the Iranian regime, carried out the deadliest assault on Jewish people since the Holocaust. Over 1,200 Israelis were murdered: civilians were burned alive in their homes, children were executed and more than 250 people were taken hostage. No reasonable or responsible Parliament would fail to condemn such atrocities. Equally, however, we cannot look away from what has happened in Gaza in the months since then. Whilst we would say that Israel has the right to defend itself, it does not have the right to unlimited military action. The conduct and scale of its military campaign has caused immense civilian destruction. Entire communities lie in ruins: schools, hospitals and refugee camps have been bombed and thousands of people, many of them children, have died. I will not stand up here and defend any country or any military force that kills children and innocent civilians. It is not wrong to say that that is what our amendment does: it gives balance. It says that that is deplorable.

I will take nothing from someone who tweeted on 7 October and said "Up the resistance".

We have witnessed the deliberate obstruction of humanitarian aid and the denial of food, water, fuel and medicine into Gaza. That is not a tragic accident of war: it was a systemic and calculated denial of human dignity. I suggest that it contravenes the Geneva Convention in the sense of lawful military conduct. No Government can or should justify starvation as a weapon. Our amendment responds to all of that. It condemns terrorism and:

"reaffirms that all civilian life, whether Palestinian or Israeli, is of equal value".

It rejects collective punishment and forced displacement. It calls for immediate access for aid and medicine and the urgent release of all hostages. It acknowledges Iran's destabilising influence through its ongoing support of Hamas and other proxy forces. As we all did, Mr Speaker, I am sure that you woke up this morning to uncertain and unconfirmed reports of a possible ceasefire between Israel and Iran. While some have welcomed that as a breakthrough, the situation remains highly volatile. Iran has denied any formal agreement, as far as I know, and there are already claims of violations from both sides. We must, however, be clear-eyed: a few hours of quiet does not signal peace. Nevertheless, even the whisper of de-escalation should compel renewed diplomatic pressure to turn fragile moments into lasting change. This should not be about taking sides but about defending humanity and the rule of law. It is about demanding a future where Palestinians and Israelis can live in peace and security through a credible two-state solution. Our amendment is principled and honest and, by golly, it is absolutely necessary, given the state of the debate today. I urge Members to support our amendment. I urge the Alliance Party and the SDLP to reflect on the points that I have made, particularly about balance and that Palestinian children and Israeli children are of equal value. That is in our amendment but is missing from the motion. This is a complex issue, but we need to deal with it with compassion, clarity and accuracy.

992 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:56 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification