The Telegraph, on West Bank, 27 October 2026

7.3out of 10Serious

British MPs

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.5 findings

Two MPs and an MSP they were detained for eight hours by Israeli authorities and . Labour’s Clive Lewis and the SNP’s Lara Bird, along with Kate Nevens of the Scottish Greens, sought to enter the territory on Monday as part of a delegation organised by political group Progressive International. According to Progressive International, the delegation – which also included Sam Tarry, a former Labour MP, and Josu Estarrona Elizondo, a Spanish senator – was stopped while making the crossing from Jordan.

They had planned to undertake “a programme of meetings with Palestinian academics, students and civil society organisations” as well as to join the olive harvest after what it claimed were “mounting attacks” against farmers in the territory. The Israeli embassy said the group were refused entry after “providing false information about the purpose of their visit” and failing to co-operate with officials. The incident took place before Tuesday’s Israeli elections in which Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister, could be ousted from power.

In a post on X, Mr Lewis said: “For more than eight hours, we were held, interrogated and made to feel as though we had done something wrong simply by attempting to enter. “The simple truth is we had done nothing wrong. “We went to show our support for the Palestinian people and highlight the terrible injustice and violence being perpetrated against them. “We want to ensure that people back home do not look away from the reality of what is happening.

“Ultimately, we went to show solidarity. But we left with an even greater determination to speak out. “We will not be silenced, and we will not look away. None of us should.” Ms Bird, who was elected this year to the Arbroath and Broughty Ferry seat on Scotland’s east coast, posted: “We were held for eight hours, interrogated and ultimately prevented from crossing the border. “I came to stand alongside Palestinians being attacked for harvesting olives on their own land.

Instead, we were turned away, with no reason given. “More than ever, Palestinians are being subject to terror and violence by the IDF and illegal settlers. “Increased blockades, demolitions and unthinkable violence have become the norm for Palestinians in the West Bank. “It is more important now than ever that we bear witness and show our solidarity.”

Ms Nevens, a Green MSP, added: “We had travelled to the West Bank to stand in solidarity with Palestinians facing escalating violence, and to join the olive harvesters . “We went to bear witness, to listen to Palestinian communities and to help shine a light on the abuses taking place. “The Israeli forces didn’t want us to see the demolished homes, or the settlers inflicting so much misery or the day to day indignities that are so central to the occupation.”

Ed Miliband , the Foreign Secretary, said he was “deeply concerned” about the incident. In the Commons, Dr Simon Opher, the Labour MP for Stroud, asked whether Mr Miliband would join him in condemning the blocking of MPs from entering the territory. The Foreign Secretary responded: “We are obviously deeply concerned about the denial of entry to the West Bank for two Members of Parliament, and I believe one member of the Scottish Parliament as well.

“We have raised this issue with the Israeli authorities and been in touch with the MPs to offer assistance. “More broadly, it’s very, very important that members of this House, as they go about their business – not just in the UK but internationally – have free access so that they can actually do their duties.” The embassy of Israel in the UK said: “”

Read the original article on telegraph.co.uk (opens in a new tab)
What we found (5)

The Telegraph reports the detention of British parliamentarians at the crossing into the West Bank but never calls the West Bank occupied in its own voice. It ends on the Israeli embassy's unevidenced accusation of false information, which the MPs' own accounts contest, and says the MPs 'have claimed' what the embassy simply 'said'.

  1. Gives a contested claim the last word

    Serious

    “The group was refused entry to Israel after failing to co-operate with border officials and providing false information about the purpose of their visit.”

    Why this matters
    The Telegraph closes the article on the Israeli embassy's accusation that the parliamentarians lied and failed to co-operate. It repeats the claim already given in S5 and sets nothing against it.
    The impression it gives
    A reader leaves believing the group was turned back for giving false information, and that the matter concerned entry to Israel.
    The context
    The article itself shows the claim is contested. Ms Bird says they were turned away with no reason given and Mr Lewis says they had done nothing wrong. The article offers no evidence for the embassy's accusation. The group was trying to enter the West Bank, not Israel, and the ICJ has ruled Israel's occupation of the West Bank unlawful.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“we were turned away, with no reason given”
    • Elsewhere in the article“we had done nothing wrong”
    • Elsewhere in the article“denied entry to the West Bank”
    • On the recordThe International Court of Justice's July 2024 advisory opinion found Israel's occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem unlawful.icj-cij.org (opens in a new tab)

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    The Israeli embassy said the group was refused entry for giving false information and failing to co-operate, but gave no evidence. The parliamentarians say they were given no reason and had done nothing wrong.

  2. Hedges the documented record

    Serious

    “denied entry to the West Bank”

    Why this matters
    The Telegraph names the West Bank without calling it occupied. In its own voice it never does so anywhere in the article, even though the story turns on Israel controlling who may enter Palestinian territory.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes Israel is policing its own border, and may read Israel's refusal as an ordinary act of a state controlling its own territory.
    The context
    The West Bank is occupied, and the ICJ ruled the occupation unlawful in July 2024. The only mention of the occupation in the article comes inside Ms Nevens's quote. Other coverage of the same event calls it the occupied West Bank.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Two MPs and an MSP say they were detained for eight hours by Israeli authorities and denied entry to the occupied West Bank.

  3. Unsourced insinuation

    Minor

    “Reports suggest the two MPs could have sought permission to access the West Bank from the Israeli government.”

    Why this matters
    The Telegraph inserts "Reports suggest" with no named source, report or detail, in the middle of the MPs' accounts. The sentence also treats the Israeli government as the proper authority over entry to the West Bank.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes the MPs could easily have avoided being stopped and so share the blame for their own detention.
    The context
    The article names no report and gives nothing to support the suggestion. Nor does it say what such permission involves or whether it would have been granted. Israel controls entry to the West Bank only as the occupying power, and the ICJ has ruled that occupation unlawful.

    How we know

    • On the recordThe International Court of Justice's July 2024 advisory opinion found Israel's occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem unlawful.icj-cij.org (opens in a new tab)

    Show it in the article

  4. Headline goes beyond the article

    Minor

    “‘detained by Israeli authorities for eight hours’”

    Why this matters
    The headline puts quotation marks around words nobody in the article said, which distances the outlet from the detention.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes the eight-hour detention as a doubtful claim.
    The context
    The MPs said they were held for eight hours, and the Israeli embassy does not deny holding them. It only gives its reason for refusing entry.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“We were held for eight hours”
    • Elsewhere in the article“For more than eight hours, we were held”
    • Elsewhere in the article“The group was refused entry to Israel”

    Show it in the article

  5. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “have claimed”

    Why this matters
    The Telegraph says the parliamentarians "have claimed" they were detained, while the Israeli embassy simply "said" its version.
    The impression it gives
    A reader treats the MPs' account as less reliable than the embassy's.
    The context
    The embassy's account is the one the article gives no evidence for. The MPs' detention is not disputed in the article.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“The Israeli embassy said the group were refused entry”

    Show it in the article

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from The Telegraph

Everything we scored from The Telegraph