Are Palestinian terrorists benefiting from British taxpayers' money? Dfid doesn't care

A Palestinian youth throws a missile at Israeli police officers

On Sunday, Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian leader, publicly condemned the Holocaust, calling it as “a heinous crime”. Clearly, the fact that this was seen as such a big story was a depressing reflection of the near-ubiquity of Holocaust denial in the Arab world. Nevertheless, many in the West have reacted with relief, even jubilation.

But there is a danger that enthusiasm for a glimmer of hope in the Middle East will eclipse the darker reality. Let’s not forget that the week before, Abbas had agreed a reconciliation deal with the terror group, Hamas; very shortly, Western powers may have to deal with the spectre of Hamas in government.

Moreover, let’s not forget that in 1983, the same Mahmoud Abbas wrote a doctoral thesis entitled The Other Side: The Secret Relationship Between Nazism and Zionism, in which he referred to the Holocaust as "The Zionist fantasy, the fantastic lie that six million Jews were killed".

Perhaps he has changed his mind. Or perhaps he was spinning the media. Either way, the Palestinian leadership must do a lot more if it is to convince us that it has finally left behind attitudes that are obstacles to peace. And the British Government must do more to acknowledge the uncomfortable reality of the Palestinian leadership.

On Sunday, I reported that the Palestinian Authority is paying huge financial rewards to about 5,000 convicted terrorists, as part of official policy. Under 2004 Palestinian legislation known as the Palestinian Law of the Prisoner, those convicted of terror offences – or “resisting the occupation” – are immediately placed on the Palestinian Authority payroll.

Payments are allocated on an increasing scale, so that the worst offenders, who are serving the longest sentences, receive the highest stipends. The longest-serving terrorists receive about £2,000 per month, plus bonuses for wives and children. Grants made upon release can be as much as £50,000. The average Palestinian wage is about £312 per month.

Needless to say, these payments are only made to convicted terrorists, not those guilty of other crimes such as theft or fraud. And when I telephoned the Palestinian Authority, they made no apologies.

“We have nothing to hide,” said Amr Nasser, director of the Ministry of Detainees’ and Ex-Detainees’ Affairs. “The bottom line here is the way those detainees are perceived by the Palestinian people.

“These people are heroes, and freedom fighters, [who] are making this sacrifice for a better future for their children and people as a whole.” He added that the money was to recognise “the dignity of Palestinian freedom fighters.”

These “freedom fighters”, of course, include men like Abdallah Barghouti, who is serving multiple life sentences for orchestrating attacks that killed 67 Israeli civilians in 2001 and 2002, including at least seven children and a pregnant woman; and Amjad and Hakim Awad, who in 2011 stabbed to death five members of the same family, including two children and a three-month-old baby. Barghouti alone is likely to have received about £100,000.

So why does this matter to Britain? The answer is simple: because we are propping up Palestinian public spending to the tune of £343 million between 2011 and 2015.

Dfid says that it has ensured that British taxpayers’ money is paid into an account that is ring-fenced for paying civil servants, not terrorists. I spoke to the local man who audits this account, and it is true. But this could be seen as little more than a fig leaf.

The fact is that the Palestinian Authority relies on foreign donors to fund 40 per cent of its budget. Meanwhile, it spends between four and six per cent on rewarding terrorists, a figure roughly proportionately equivalent to Britain’s entire defence budget, which stands at 4.5 per cent. So while Western donors prioritise state building, the Palestinian Authority prioritises terror. And without aid money, the whole edifice would collapse.

Here we come to the nub of the thing. If after a few telephone calls and a couple of days of investigation I could discover that the Palestinian Authority is providing massive rewards for terrorists, why couldn’t Dfid do the same? I’m not an Arabic speaker, and I was sitting in an office in Victoria. The Government has no shortage of Arabists, many of whom have regular contact with the Palestinians. What is going on?

Indeed, all the Government would have to do would be to follow the official Palestinian newspapers and television channels. An Israeli NGO, Palestinian Media Watch (PMW), has recorded countless statements made by officials which expose the reality of their payments to prisoners.

Let me cite just one example. Speaking on official Palestinian television in November, Issa Karake, the Palestinian Authority’s minister of prisoner’s affairs, said: “The Europeans want their money that comes to us to remain clean, not to go to families of those they claim to be terrorists. [But European countries] need to renounce this occupation mentality. These are heroes, self-sacrificing fighters… We appreciate the people of the revolution and are proud of them.”

I received a stark insight into the Government’s attitude when I was writing the story. Initially, Dfid gave me the following statement: “UK taxpayer funds do not pay for Palestinian prisoners. British funding to the Palestinian Authority is used for the sole purpose of paying the salaries of civil servants, who are responsible for providing health, education and other essential services, including security.” A spokesman also told me, in no uncertain terms, that these were “welfare payments”, designed to support families whose “main breadwinner” had been imprisoned. Suggestions to the contrary, he said, were “odd”.

So I gathered evidence to demonstrate that this was untrue, including an official Palestinian document in Arabic, verified by the PA, which I had had independently translated, outlining payments to those convicted of terror charges. This showed that there is a separate provision made for wives and children, which indicates that the main payment is intended as a bonus for the terrorist himself.

But after a day or two of contemplation, Dfid replied that “the original line stands”. Clearly, the best way to deal with inconvenient evidence was simply to ignore it.

It is time that the Government stopped treating the British taxpayer with disdain. It may be politically inconvenient to address the reality of the situation. But for as long as the Government fails to do so, trust in British politics will continue to decline.