MORE than 30 parliamentarians urged the Prime Minister to show “basic humanity” for Gazans yesterday after he vowed to close a “loophole” that allowed a Palestinian family to remain in Britain under a Ukrainian refugee scheme. 

The cross-party letter arranged by Labour MP Kim Johnson comes a day after Sir Keir Starmer was criticised by England’s most senior judge for saying a judge had made the “wrong decision” in the case.

The letter, signed by Labour, independent, Green and Lib Dem MPs, including former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, Green Party co-leader Carla Denyer, as well as four peers, asked Sir Keir to clarify his comments during Prime Minister’s Questions last week.

“The family in question is a mother, father and their four children aged 18,17, eight and seven who were displaced from their home in Gaza in September when it was destroyed by an Israeli air strike,” it said.

“As you know, there is still no resttlement route for Palestinian fleeing the bloodshed, starvatation and bombardment that has devastated Gaza for over 15 months.”

Noting that the government created resttlement options for Afghans in 2021 and Ukrainians the following year, it added: “Basic humanity shouldn’t be selective.

“If Britain supports safe routes and medical evacuation for some, why should it be any different for families fleeing conflict in Gaza?

“We would be grateful if you could clarify what ‘loophole’ in the Ukraine Family Scheme the Home Secretary [Yvette Cooper] is looking at closing as a result of the application by a Palestinian family, and what the justfication for taking such an action would be.”

On Tuesday, Lady Chief Justice Dame Sue Carr voiced her concern after Sir Keir said a judge had made the “wrong decision” by letting the family of six from Gaza settle in Britain under the Ukrainian refugee scheme.

He vowed to close the “loophole” after Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said the decision, made following two appeals, was “completely wrong” and “cannot be allowed to stand.”

Baroness Carr said: “Both question and the answer were unacceptable.

“It is for the government visibly to respect and protect the independence of the judiciary.

“Where parties, including the government, disagree with their findings, they should do so through the appellate process.”

A government spokesperson said: “The Prime Minister has made clear that it is for Parliament to make the laws and for the government to decide policy.”