Questions about Catherine West's record on Gaza

Looking at Catherine West’s record, it’s hard not to see a classic case of a politician choosing her ministerial car and junkets abroad over her convictions.

When she was in opposition, her language in the House was powerful and direct. She called the situation in Gaza a "humanitarian catastrophe" and an act of "collective punishment" against innocent people. She visited the West Bank with activist groups and signed motions demanding an immediate ceasefire, speaking with the passion of a true believer.

But what a difference a government job makes.

Now, as a Foreign Office minister, that fire has been extinguished. The "collective punishment" she once condemned is now cautiously described as something that "does risk breaching" international law. The "humanitarian catastrophe" has been downgraded to a "dire" situation. When asked about the most serious war crimes, she now deflects, saying it's for "legal experts to determine."

This isn't an entirely new pattern. Back in 2023, when faced with a vote on a ceasefire that she claimed to support, she chose to abstain with the party leadership to save her job, while other colleagues resigned on principle.

It seems that for all the strong words and passionate statements made from the opposition benches, the comfort of a ministerial position has proven more persuasive. She's had the chance to speak out, but instead, continues to choose self-preservation.

Almost two years on, the words of journalist Omar El Akkad are more damning than ever.

One day, when it’s safe, when there’s no personal downside to calling a thing what it is, when it’s too late to hold anyone accountable, everyone will have always been against this.