Speeches by Law.

“Do you expect that advice to be better to Ministers in future or different in any way?”

“Matthew, turning to the work that the UK is supporting, what is the value of countries like the UK investing in atrocity prevention in Myanmar?”

“Matthew, you mentioned that the lack of accountability is one of the reasons why this is such an acute issue in Myanmar. I am wondering to what extent you think that that is the case the world over for atrocities—that it is that lack of accountability through, for example, courts of international law. We are very aware…”

“Briefly, Minister, do you think the public is sufficiently aware of the concept of diplomatic leverage that you have outlined? Looking back, do you think there are any instances where the UK Government have got that balance wrong?”

“Matthew, thank you for all the work you are doing. Could you outline the importance of atrocity prevention work to countries like Myanmar?”

“Matthew, you have mentioned aid, particularly to refugees, as a means of prevention. You have mentioned that as a key driver. You have mentioned the role of international law. What else could the UK do to prevent future atrocities in Myanmar?”

“Do you expect that advice to be better to Ministers in future or different in any way?”

“Briefly, Minister, do you think the public is sufficiently aware of the concept of diplomatic leverage that you have outlined? Looking back, do you think there are any instances where the UK Government have got that balance wrong?”

“This is a question to Will, and then one to you, Minister. Very briefly, has the process for risk assessment and escalation been reviewed and changed since El Fasher?”

“I think you have probably more than answered my question, although perhaps I could just dig a little bit deeper into some of the difference between your interpretation, Kate, and yours, Nathaniel, which says essentially that there have been failings at the highest level of Government, from Ministers. These are very ser…”

“Thank you for being here, and no pressure, given the gravitas of what we have just heard from the previous panel. What is your vision and ambition for the FCDO’s conflict prevention and atrocity work?”

“Thank you. Do you see conflict and atrocity prevention as two separate issues?”

“What, in practice, has been the impact of these cuts on your organisation and others undertaking this atrocity prevention work?”

“I think you have probably more than answered my question, although perhaps I could just dig a little bit deeper into some of the difference between your interpretation, Kate, and yours, Nathaniel, which says essentially that there have been failings at the highest level of Government, from Ministers. These are very ser…”

“What, in practice, has been the impact of these cuts on your organisation and others undertaking this atrocity prevention work?”

“Matthew, thank you for all the work you are doing. Could you outline the importance of atrocity prevention work to countries like Myanmar?”

“Matthew, you mentioned that the lack of accountability is one of the reasons why this is such an acute issue in Myanmar. I am wondering to what extent you think that that is the case the world over for atrocities—that it is that lack of accountability through, for example, courts of international law. We are very aware…”

“Matthew, you have mentioned aid, particularly to refugees, as a means of prevention. You have mentioned that as a key driver. You have mentioned the role of international law. What else could the UK do to prevent future atrocities in Myanmar?”

“Matthew, turning to the work that the UK is supporting, what is the value of countries like the UK investing in atrocity prevention in Myanmar?”

“Thank you for being here, and no pressure, given the gravitas of what we have just heard from the previous panel. What is your vision and ambition for the FCDO’s conflict prevention and atrocity work?”