In the House of Lords, peers raised the alarm over sabotage and disruptive actions targeting the UK’s defence and aerospace industry.
Baroness Goldie (Conservative) told the chamber: “The activity to which the noble Lord, Lord Austin, rightly refers is de facto sabotage of our critical defence capability. In Napoleonic times, setting fire to a naval dockyard was construed as such and punishable by death, which was abolished only by the Criminal Damage Act 1971.”
She then asked: “Does the Minister agree that any sabotage activity of the type described is profoundly serious, and is he satisfied that the criminal law is adequate to deal with the appropriate charge and penalty in such grave circumstances?”
Replying for the Government, Lord Coaker (Labour) stressed that ministers had no intention of revisiting capital punishment. “Let me start my remarks by saying that, whatever I say now, we have no intention of restoring the death penalty—let us get that out of the way first; whatever review may or may not take place, that is not on the table.”
Lord Coaker went on to underline the gravity of the threat. “The noble Baroness who speaks for the Opposition makes an important point. This is a very serious matter. That is why we have proscribed Palestine Action. That is why we will take the action necessary to protect our defence industry and to stop intimidation and do all we can to support our world-leading industry.”
He confirmed that the issue remained under close review across Whitehall: “We will always continue to discuss with our Home Office colleagues and with others across government whether more needs to be done. Let us be clear: there is legitimate protest, which is perfectly acceptable, but some of the things that have gone on are totally unacceptable.”
Baroness Goldie pressed the point further, citing the need for prosecutions to deter future incidents. “That is why we see people before the courts. We work strongly with the Home Office, the police and others to ensure that those who think that they can do that will face the full force of the law.”
Her intervention was framed around the seriousness of threats to facilities essential for Britain’s defence posture. “Any sabotage activity of the type described is profoundly serious,” she reiterated, making clear that Parliament must be assured the law provides sufficient deterrence.
Lord Coaker agreed that enforcement was essential, repeating that there was a clear distinction between lawful protest and criminal acts. “There is legitimate protest, which is perfectly acceptable,” he said, “but some of the things that have gone on are totally unacceptable.”
