Asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of recent aerial bombardments in the war in Sudan. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Lord Wood of Anfield) (Lab) The increasing use of aerial warfare, including drones, is inflicting devastating harm on civilians and civilian infrastructure in Sudan, killing over 1,000 civilians in the first half of this year and contributing to the growing risk of famine in the country. The UK, both publicly and in our diplomatic engagements, is urging the warring parties to protect civilians, comply with international humanitarian law and facilitate safe and unhindered humanitarian access. At the UN General Assembly, the Foreign Secretary and Minister for International Development convened international partners to co-ordinate action to protect civilians in Sudan and issued a communiqué on behalf of the UK-convened coalition for atrocity prevention on the impact of drone warfare on civilians. Lord Alton of Liverpool (CB) My Lords, I thank the Minister for his reply. Can he tell us what response we have received from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons about credible allegations concerning the use of chemical weapons in Sudan and the bringing to justice of those responsible, along with the quartermasters whose actions have led to an estimated 400,000 deaths in Sudan? That includes terrible atrocities in El Fasher in Darfur, the displacement of some 14 million people and 19 million people facing acute food insecurity and famine. As penholders in the Security Council, will the Minister take this opportunity to clarify reports that the UK intends to support a candidate to become Secretary-General of the United Nations who has dismissed the findings of the UN’s own panel of experts about the involvement of the UAE in arming RSF paramilitaries? What convoluted message would this send on seeking an end to the world’s most deadly and catastrophic war? Lord Wood of Anfield (Lab) I thank the noble Lord for that and pay tribute to him; no one inside or outside this House does more to keep the spotlight shining on what is the worst humanitarian crisis facing the world in the 21st century, and I thank him for that. On the chemical weapons issue, we take any alleged breach of the Chemical Weapons Convention very seriously. As Sudan is a state party to that convention, we expect all those in Sudan to abide by the prohibition on developing, producing, processing, transferring or using chemical weapons. We have consistently raised concerns about allegations of weapon use by the Sudanese Armed Forces, including at the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. I hosted the director-general of the OPCW a couple of weeks ago in this very building and discussed exactly that, and we are using our national and Sudan-specific statements at the OPCW’s executive council to further this agenda. On the issue of the United Nations Secretary-General, I urge everyone in the House not to believe wild speculation in the newspapers on any UK preference for any candidate; we do not comment in public on that, and that is how we will continue to approach this issue. Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD) The actions that the UK has taken on the credible information on the use of chlorine gas on civilians is that it has asked the alleged perpetrators to investigate their own actions. This is wholly insufficient. Under Articles IX and X of the Chemical Weapons Convention, the UK, as a state party, can take actions to demand independent investigations of this credible information on the use of gas. As the UN Security Council penholder for Sudan, why have we not taken this action? Lord Wood of Anfield (Lab) …We are engaging on a number of strands of this issue with the OPCW. He is absolutely right that part of that is urging Sudan to conclude the investigation that is under way…See