On this evidence, the pledge and the paperwork are moving at different speeds.
The British government announced on 8 September that it would take action against companies and individuals providing services such as construction, infrastructure, financing or real estate for settlement expansion in the occupied West Bank. According to an Al Jazeera investigation published on 10 November, public bodies have since published details of 18 further contracts with companies linked to illegal Israeli settlements, worth about 10.7 million pounds, or $14.4m. The investigation draws on procurement records, company filings, corporate disclosures and contract data supplied by Tussell, a British public sector market intelligence firm.
The timing is the substance of the story. When Ed Miliband, the foreign secretary, told the House of Commons that those who finance or facilitate illegal settlements would face "the full force of UK sanctions", the implication was that procurement would follow the sanctions regime. The contracts identified by Al Jazeera suggest that, at least in the weeks since, it has not. Neve Gordon, a professor at the school of law at Queen Mary University of London, told the outlet that the companies "appear to be in breach of their legal obligations under international humanitarian law", and that any UK company involved in the occupation is likely to be in direct breach of the regime Miliband is putting in place. Jeremy Corbyn, the independent MP and former Labour leader, said public money was still going to firms that could be targeted under the government's own regime.
The Cabinet Office did not respond to Al Jazeera's request for comment. It has previously said that individual public authorities decide whether to exclude suppliers on a case-by-case basis, and that UK procurement should not be used to boycott suppliers linked to other countries unless formal British sanctions, embargoes or restrictions are in place. That position explains the gap between announcement and practice: a sanctions power aimed at named companies and individuals is not the same instrument as a procurement exclusion, and until designations are made, contracting authorities retain discretion.
The largest holdings belong to Motorola Solutions, which the UN lists for settlement-related activities. Al Jazeera puts its UK contracts at about 1.7 billion pounds, most of it through Airwave Solutions, including a Home Office extension worth 1.562 billion pounds for the communications network used by police, fire and ambulance services. Heidelberg Materials, listed in the UN's September 2026 index update, has three subsidiaries named in 14 contracts worth 10.4 million pounds, mostly roadworks for National Highways and councils in Nottingham and Lincolnshire. The group has previously said its Israeli subsidiary ceased operations at the Nahal Raba quarry in 2023; Who Profits says expansion was approved in May 2025, an assertion Heidelberg did not dispute in its response to Al Jazeera. Smaller awards went to subsidiaries of Fosun International and Egis, which told Al Jazeera it had formally expressed disagreement with its UN listing.
What is not yet established is decisive. The report does not show that any of these companies has been designated under the new powers, nor that the contracts breach British law as it stands. The government's sanctions architecture is still being built, and the Cabinet Office's case-by-case doctrine leaves the choice with hundreds of contracting authorities. The political question is whether London will close that gap by designation or leave procurement to drift from its stated policy. On this evidence, the pledge and the paperwork are moving at different speeds.
