Bruce George, who has long campaigned on behalf of indigenous people throughout the world, is supporting a campaign by Survival International calling on the Government to ratify the ILO Convention 169. The Convention recognises their rights to remain in possession of their lands, and to be consulted about projects which would affect them.

By today signing EDM 1299 Bruce has joined with Survive in accepting that to ensure the survival of tribal and indigenous people their land rights must be recognised and protected.

Today’s act is just the latest example of Bruce’s past campaigning on behalf of indigenous and tribal peoples. Indeed Bruce has the distinction of having a debate in the Canadian House of Commons in the early 1980s to have him thrown out of Canada for his campaigning on behalf of the native people of Canada, the Inuit’s (formerly referred to as Eskimo’s).

Speaking about the debate Bruce said today:

“Fortunately I was already back in London by the time of the debate, but I told the journalist who informed me of the short debate that I would happily return to Canada so they could throw me out!”

Bruce today met with the Prime Minister of Georgia Nikoloz Gilauri. Bruce, who is chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Georgia, discussed with the Prime Minister recent events in Georgia including the conflict with Russia and their ongoing program of political reform.

Bruce has been very supportive of Georgia in recent years having participated in a number of election observation missions to the country. Since the Rose Revolution he has been active in supporting good governance programs within the country.

Bruce George MP today welcomed the progress made at this week’s London G20 summit and praised the achievements reached. The Leaders at the G20 agreed to:

Restore confidence, growth, and jobs: They committed to make available an additional $1.1 trillion programme of support to help the world economy through the crisis and to restore credit, growth and jobs.

Strengthen financial supervision and regulation: Leaders agreed to strengthen the financial system by putting in place a better and more credible system of surveillance and regulation

Fund and reform our international financial institutions to overcome this crisis and prevent future ones: Leaders agreed to make an additional $850 billion in resources available through international financial institutions like the IMF,

Promote global trade and investment and reject protectionism to underpin prosperity: Leaders committed not to resort to protectionism

Build an inclusive, green, and sustainable recovery: Leaders reaffirmed their commitment to meeting the Millennium Development Goals and to delivering on development aid pledges

Bruce George MP said:

“I have been raising the need for tough regulation of the financial markets for some time, so I am very happy at the G20 outcome. On the 27th January I spoke in a committee debate on Credit Rating Agencies where I called for the need for much greater global regulation of financial markets, especially these agencies. I am therefore particularly pleased to learn that the G20 yesterday to extend regulatory oversight to credit rating agencies.

We face a global financial crisis on a scale that we have never really seen before. At the end of the day to get British economy back on track we have to help get the world economy back on track too. To protect jobs and businesses in Walsall we needed to get the world leaders working together to restore confidence, growth and jobs.

“So I welcome the successes the Government has secured this week. The London Summit brought together leaders of the world’s major economies and key international institutions. They have agreed collective action necessary to stabilise the world economy and secure recovery and jobs.”

Bruce George MP, leader of the UK Delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, today tabled an Early Day Motion in Parliament welcoming the 60th Anniversary of NATO on the 4th April. Bruce George, who is also Vice President of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly was joined in the EDM by a further ten members of the NATO PA.

Speaking today Bruce George said “NATO is probably the most enduring alliance in history. It survives as it is needed in this increasingly dangerous and volatile world. It’s evolved into being much more than just a defence organisation.”

The EDMs text read –

“That this House recognises and commemorates the 60th anniversary of NATO on 4 April 2009; pays tribute to NATO’s historic role in safeguarding the security and freedom of its members and, with the end of the Cold War, in promoting and extending stability and security to its new members; acknowledges the UK’s role in establishing NATO and its continued commitment to the Alliance; welcomes the close co-operation between NATO and the NATO Parliamentary Assembly and acknowledges the important role of Parliamentarians; stresses the importance of a co-operative relationship between NATO and the Russian Federation based on their common strategic interests; welcomes the accession of new member states to the Alliance and supports the Bucharest Summit Declaration which kept NATO’s door open for future enlargement with European democracies which are willing and able to assume the responsibilities and obligations of membership; underlines NATO’s crucial role in assisting Afghanistan to establish a secure environment for political and economic development; calls for a more equitable distribution of responsibilities across NATO’s member states; highlights NATO’s engagement around the world to build security and foster stability, from the Balkans to Darfur and to relief support following the Pakistan earthquake; and acknowledges the important role NATO plays in strengthening the Allies’ common values of democracy, human rights, individual liberty and the rule of law and reaffirms NATO’s irreplaceable role as the guarantor of its members’ security and an indispensable promoter of stability throughout the Euro-Atlantic region and beyond.”

Why should we worry about Georgia when, lets be frank, many people have very little knowledge or interest of its location, politics or aspirations? They do now! We should have a great interest in Georgia. I have many friends living there who have phoned me over the last few days expressing their fear for the future and fearing the Russians will further bomb the capitol Tbilisi and reoccupy the country.

Located in the troubled region of the Caucasus, little Georgia (4.5 million pop.) broke away from Russia during the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and has become very western oriented in the last few years, expressing a wish to join the EU and NATO and showing its commitment by sending around 10% of their armed forces to Iraq in support of the UN resolution. The country is also moving along the path of democratisation and needs support to help consolidate its democracy.

Russia has been very difficult towards Georgia since its independence; it has helped militarily to establish, fund and protect two breakaway regions, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. They have at different times cut off energy supplies, expelled thousands of Georgians, installed a trade embargo on Georgian exports, and sent spies into the country. The list of provocative actions is extremely long.

Russia knows that Georgian President Saakashvili can be occasionally impetuous and they deliberately provoked another clash with the Georgians. The Georgian government responded by entering the breakaway province of South Ossetia. The famous “Fog of War” prevents anyone being absolutely certain of the sequence of events – but it was bloody.

On cue the Russians, in the form of the 58th Army, mercenaries and other assorted guys up for a fight, headed quickly for the conflict zone with a pre-arranged plan. They had already reinforced Abkhazia and Russian forces clearly supported the Abkhaz military who it supplied, to attack the small part of Abkhazia, the Kodori Gorge, which Georgia held. Russians launched attacks deep into Georgia, from South Ossetia and Abkhazia. After a fierce period of fighting the Georgian’s withdrew and declared a ceasefire. This was very much a David and Goliath fight, the Georgian armed forces combined have little over 20,000 men, while the Russian army has well over 1,000,000; in the adjacent area alone they have 90,000 soldiers. Russia’s sizeable air force also overwhelmingly out numbers Georgia’s small force of just 8 ageing combat aircraft with little air defence. It also has virtually no navy, just a handful of small boats.

Russia has used its Black Sea Fleet to establish a blockade and has sunk a Georgian vessel. Russia’s campaign went far beyond the South Ossetian border and targeted and destroyed military infrastructure obviously to remove any capabilities for the Georgians to cont8inue t o fight in Georgia itself. I use itself because South Ossetia and Abkhazia are recognised in international law as being part of Georgia. Innocent civilian targets have also been bombed with a high number of deaths and a vast number of refugees fleeing the violence. Some of my many friends have been forced to evacuate because of the violence. There has even been a failed attempt to bomb the oil and gas pipeline which is 30% owned by BP, and is a vital supply of oil and gas to Europe.

It now appears that the Russian President has called a halt to Russia’s military actions, but at what cost? President Medvedev’s offer of a ceasefire does not come without strings. Numerous figures in the Russian government have made it quite clear they want to see the removal of President Saakashvili as they do not trust him because he’s an outspoken critic and is non-compliant with their wishes.

It appeared a day ago (13th August) that the Russians were going to, in the words of the famous American Civil War song, “March through Georgia”. The triumphalist march by General Sherman that broke the Confederacy in the American Civil War led to the song Marching Through Georgia. It appeared the Russians domination of Georgia would be inevitable. They had already subdued Gori (Stalin’s birth place) and much of the rest of the country. It appears that international pressure and the Russian realisation of the damage it had done to its reputation possibly led to the five point ceasefire agreement, negotiated by French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who currently holds the rotating EU Presidency. The French President had a weak hand to play and the agreement will see no more use of force, an end to all military actions, free access to humanitarian aid, Georgian troops to return to their permanent place of deployment, and Russian forces to return to their pre-conflict positions.

At time of writing it is uncertain whether that agreement is going to be honoured by the Russians. Yesterday there were numerous stories of continued Russian military advances into Georgia, and the anxious telephone messages I have been receiving from friends in Georgia were later confirmed. It was widely reported that South Ossetian and irregular Russian forces were looting and pillaging as an act of revenge on innocent Georgian citizens.

I do not know if the Russians have a plan B or plan C to hang around in Georgian territory playing mind games as well as threatening militarily. The rhetoric from Washington has stepped up in the last few days and the US has already committed military aircraft to deliver humanitarian assistance. Naval vessels are also Georgia-bound to deliver supplies to help the tens of thousands of refugees with little food and water, many of whom have fled the violence to Tbilisi. In addition to delivering aid, I believe the Americans are sending a strong signal to Russia by placing non-combat military personnel in Georgia which will add to the potential consequences should Russia decide to go for broke and capture Tbilisi and impose its plan B or plan C on the Georgian people.

So can the international community do anything else? Not much I’m afraid, but I’m sure they’re searching for their limited range of options. In the last few days Bush and others made stronger statements warning Russia of the consequences should they break the ceasefire. The UK has also announced it will give £500,000 to the aid effort. Military support is not an option so we have to hope international pressure from the UN, EU and OSCE will convince Russia to withdraw its forces immediately without delay. It will not be before it has achieved its objectives. If this conflict reignites, Russia will pay a high price; the Georgians will pay even more. If, however, Russia attacks the Georgian capital then we can expect a much stronger reaction from the international community.

The ceasefire is very fragile and no-one knows what might emerge in the difficult days ahead.

Bruce George MP, is Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Georgia and headed Election Observation Missions to Georgia during the 2004 Rose Revolution

Mr. Bruce George (Walsall, South) (Lab): Thank you, Mr. Caton. I am sorry that I arrived late. I have only heard three and a half speeches and, frankly, I am delighted that I arrived as late as did. I would have preferred it if, with your permission, I could have spoken without having listened. I find what has been said quite incredible in many respects.

I say with no disrespect to the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire) that, if the Labour party was in bed with an authoritarian party in a European institution, I would wonder whether I wished to remain in it. I wonder why the Council of Europe was in Russia anyway, observing what were obviously going to be fraudulent elections on an epic scale. Although the hon. Gentleman did not find any fraud in Vladivostok—I am not sure, because I have not been there—there could very well have been fraud at 92,000 other polling stations, because there was fraud on a systemic, epic basis.

People do not cheat at elections on election day if they have fixed the results beforehand, because the odd election observer will be running around and because they will, of course, know how many observers are on aircraft heading for Vladivostok or anywhere else. Therefore, in the five or six polling stations that anyone could visit we could be certain that were fraud going to be committed it would not be done in front of even a sympathetic ear and eye.

I headed a short-term observation mission to Russia four years ago at the Duma elections and said in my speech, which irritated the Russians, that those elections fell well short of international standards. I will not bore hon. Members with the details of why we reached our conclusions. When I was asked, as president of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe Parliamentary Assembly, whether I would observe the following presidential elections, I said, “No, I’m not going to waste British taxpayers’ money, nor will the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, in attending not an election but a coronation.”

Mr. Wilshire: Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?

Mr. George: No, I have too little time in which to speak. I can speak to the hon. Gentleman afterwards.

It was obvious that the elections were going to be fraudulent. It offends me that an organisation for which I had the deepest respect—the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights—has been subject to a persistent and lengthy campaign of abuse in an attempt to diminish its competence and to eliminate it. I have chronicled this campaign in enormous detail, fortunately, in part, with the collusion of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly.

There was a systematic attempt to prevent proper election observation. Those responsible unilaterally deconstructed ODIHR’s methodology: they would not provide visas until a few days before the election and they would only allow 70 people to turn up. I said that there were 92,000 polling stations and, quite rightly, ODIHR refused to go under those conditions. But, of course, the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, followed by or alongside the Council of Europe, went out and observed what were obviously going to be appalling elections.

When it came to the presidential elections, ODIHR was again prevented from observing. The OSCE Parliamentary Assembly wisely and belatedly refused to dignify fraudulent elections with their attendance, but the Council of Europe went along on its own, with I do not know how many people. If all the people were as friendly towards the electoral process as the hon. Gentleman who has just spoken, I am surprised that they produced a critical report.

I am not anti-Russian. I went through the cold war. I tried my best after the cold war to engage with the Russians. Yes, it was a corrupt society and, yes, Yeltsin was a flawed character, but his regime was followed by another. That regime is proceeding in such a way that alarm bells are starting to ring for me if not for others. Not only are its elections fraudulent but it is almost a single-party state.

Legitimate candidates were barred from standing. One was barred because he did not have enough signatures: 3 million signatures were whittled down to below the minimum. Legitimate candidates, including Garry Kasparov, were prevented from attending. Zhirinovsky’s party, which is not an opposition party, was also there. One other guy stood—he was very much in the Putin camp—and even the other parties are well in the pocket of the Administration. I cannot see why we should be so nice, when Russia is doing something like that on that one front alone.

The Council of Europe has about 3,000 non-governmental organisations accredited to it. What has happened to Russian NGOs? They have been deliberately targeted for destruction. What about international NGOs? Their leaders and characters working with them have been beaten up. What about the BBC World Service and the British Council? What about the overflying or near overflying of British airspace by Russian aircraft? What about all the things that Russia is doing?

Hon. Members may say, “Fine. This is an independent state. They have had one hell of a history.” We can smile and say, “We’ll help you. If democracy comes in 300 years, we’ll be around to help you over that period.” I take a rather different view. If the Russians are playing as they are, we should not go back into a cold war on our side, but we should not be supine. Some countries are being supine, first, because they are natural apologists for anybody and, secondly, because they do not like a fight and prefer the Americans and the British, largely, to do it for them, if necessary.

I am sympathetic towards Georgia and its aspirations. Hon. Members have said that we should not mess in Russia’s backyard. Does that mean that if a sovereign nation was once part of the Soviet Union and wants to get the hell out of it, we can do nothing to assist it because it is in Russia’s backyard? Ukraine may have been the origin of Russia, but it wishes to leave Russia’s orbit.

I headed the short-term observation missions to the rose and orange revolutions three or four years ago. Putin worked hard to support Yanukovych, who was a pro-Russian candidate against the democratic candidates and the party led by Yushchenko and Tymoshenko. If Ukraine wants to join NATO, despite the fact that it is adjacent to Russia, and most Ukrainians do not want to be part of Russia, that is its sovereign right. Why consider the Russian position, but not the Ukrainian position? Why consider Russian self-interest, but not Georgian self-interest?

The Georgians make the third largest contribution of soldiers to NATO’s operations, and more than many countries that are part of NATO. They have overcome their problems of authoritarianism, and they are a consolidating democracy, not a consolidated democracy. Exports to Russia have been barred, travel has been greatly restricted, and two areas that are juridically part of Georgia—South Ossetia and Abkhazia—are in essence under Russian control. Do we say to the Russians, “Ah, as this was part of your empire, we will allow you to stop other countries that want to get away from you, and to make them play by your rules in perpetuity.”? The Russians are trying to destroy Georgia, and I could spend ages telling the Chamber how the Georgians are becoming more democratic, but they are not yet there. I observed the elections, which were not as good as I had hoped, but to compare the Georgian elections to the Russian elections, and to compare some bad municipal elections in Birmingham and perhaps half a dozen other cities—we know who did the cheating—to elections elsewhere, as though that indicates that as our elections are fraudulent we should close our eyes to massive fraud in Russian elections, is disingenuous. That is as polite as I can be.

I am glad that I shall finish speaking soon, because I am becoming madder and madder about what I have heard. We must try to engage with the Russians, but not on our knees. The argument by the hon. Member for Orpington (Mr. Horam) was like jumping into Dr. Who’s telephone kiosk and going back 25 years to listen to the Tribune-reading, left-wing John Horam trashing America and supporting Russia. If I had to make a decision on our security and where it lies in the next 10, 20 or 30 years, after Bush has gone, I would much prefer to have Europe closer to the United States than toadying up to the Russians.

I thank you for your indulgence, Mr. Caton. It is difficult for a Welshman to make a short speech. I should have congratulated the Committee on its excellent report. We must not become paranoid, but we know who our allies are. Putin is going along to see his mates in NATO. He knows who they are, and he knows who they put pressure on to be nice to Russia, and to keep Georgia out. We can all name those names. No doubt he will be given a warm welcome, and will be thanked for doing a wonderful job before going back.

The main beneficiary of the summit in Bucharest will be Russia, because it will have proven that the west has no bottle whatever and that it is prepared to lie down and to take any humiliation that is heaped upon it. Russia will find its allies all over the place and in many legislatures, and will have succeeded, with our collusion, in keeping Georgia out of NATO. That will be a good day’s work for the Russians, and a bad day’s work for those who acquiesce in that objective in foreign policy.
We must not be supine. We must work with our allies and defend our national interests, even if the Russians are doing us or our allies down. We must robustly defend our position. We must hope that the Russians will not substitute the red army for Gazprom and switch off oil and gas to our NATO and European allies. If I were asked whether they would do that, I would say, as a left-wing Labour Member of Parliament once said, “Why look into a crystal ball if the future can be read in a book?” Russia has done it. It has shut off oil and gas to Georgia and Ukraine, and even to its closest ally, Belarus. When will it be our turn?

I am not a cold warrior. I do not want the cold war to return, but nor do I want an attitude of indifference—or, rather, cravenness—to the Russians because they have a bad history. What about the bad Russian history that impinged on eastern and central Europe and other parts of the world? We must consider countries other than Russia, hope that they will become democratic, and help them as far as we can. But if they seek to damage our interests, I hope that this Government and any other Government will have the bottle to stand up for our interests and those of Europe and NATO.

Bruce George MP, former President of the Organisation for Security Cooperation in Europe’s (OSCE) Parliamentary Assembly today welcomed the decision of the OSCE to reject an invitation to observe the upcoming Russian Presidential Election.

Speaking today he said “As a former President of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly and as someone who has headed 18 Short Term Observation Missions including the Russian Duma Elections in 2003 I have been following events in Russia very closely.

I am saddened that Russia is continuing its policy of preventing long term professional observation of their elections. This follows their obstructionism prior to the Duma Elections last year. ODIHR is the very highly respected election observation arm of the OSCE (of which Russia is a member) but the conditions Russia imposed made it impossible for any self respecting election observation mission to accept. ODIHR tried very hard to persuade the Russian Electoral Commission (in reality the Russian President) to allow them to do their professional job, but in the end were forced to withdraw. I am delighted too that unlike the Parliamentary elections in 2007 the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly has declined to attend.

Every man and his dog knows how far short the Russian parliamentary elections fell below international standards. The so-called Presidential “elections” have been fixed well in advance. What will pass for an election will in effect be more of a coronation and a squalid one at that.”

The Prime Minister took time out of his schedule this week to meet Bruce George MP. The meeting was called by the PM to discuss his forthcoming trip to China and India. Gordon Brown wanted to hear the views of Bruce George and a small group of Members of Parliament on the issues to be raised during the trip.

The PM outlined the objectives for the visit including making the UK the European partner of choice for Indian and Chinese trade investment; to work with India and China on the big global challenges from poverty to climate change; to promote new English language initiatives in both countries; to build sporting and cultural links and to discuss reform of the global institutions from the UN to the World Bank.

Gordon Brown said afterwards “I had an extremely useful discussion with Bruce George MP. He emphasised to me the importance of our relations with India and China and the many links between families in his constituency and family members in both countries. We discussed the importance of trade and investment links with both India and China, and development in India. We also spoke about the power of education to transform women’s lives, and therefore the lives of families and communities. I will take forward a number of issues he raised with me and report back on my return.”

Bruce George said today “It was a very useful meeting and I raised a number of issues which I hope will be helpful. I hope the Prime Minister will visit other countries in the sub-continent in the not-too distant future, especially Pakistan and Bangladesh. The Indian sub-continent is becoming more and more important, and there are a large number of people in Walsall South who follow events there very closely. I very much hope that elections will proceed in Pakistan and that democracy will develop in the region.”