THE US government can no longer be trusted when it says it does not use torture, according to a new report on human rights by a cross-party committee of MPs.

The Foreign Affairs Committee, which scrutinises the actions and policies of the Foreign and Commonwealth office, also called for an investigation into the alleged outsourcing of British nationals to be tortured in Pakistan.

The wide-ranging report, a direct response to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office's Human Rights Annual Report 2007, grimly names and shames the deteriorating human rights in countries such as Zimbabwe, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Burma and Russia.

It also calls on the UK government to put pressure on the US to close Guantanamo Bay and ensure Britain is not complicit in the rendition of detainees.

The chairman of the committee, Mike Gapes MP, said: "There are many areas in which the government is showing leadership, for instance at the UN Human Rights Council, and our report welcomes this."

But he added: "Our report highlights a number of human rights issues related to counter-terrorism. We conclude that, given the recent US practice of water-boarding, the British government can no longer rely on US assurances that it does not use torture. We also conclude that it is extremely important that the veracity of allegations that the British government has outsourced' interrogation techniques involving the torture of British nationals by Pakistani authorities should be investigated."

The fracture of trust between the US and Britain stems from President Bush vetoing a bill that would have banned water-boarding in March. A month later the foreign secretary, David Miliband, described water-boarding as an instrument of torture. In the light of this, the report said: "Given the recent practice of water-boarding by the US, there are serious implications arising from the Foreign Secretary's stated position."

The MPs urged the government to immediately carry out "an exhaustive analysis of current US interrogation techniques on the basis of such information as is publicly available or which can be supplied by the US." Other recommendations include: the government's "moral and legal obligation" to ensure flights using UK airspace and airports are not part of the "rendition circuit"; the government should be more open about the failures of the Afghan authorities; the government should not rule out invoking the "responsibility to protect" in situations such as Burma.

The report also called for the government to use the "unique opportunity" of the Beijing Olympic games to "strongly" publicly condemn the Chinese government's repression of dissidents and press for an independent international investigation to take place in Tibet. It added that the Prime Minister was right to attend the games. Andrew Tyrie MP, the chairman of the all-party parliamentary group on extraordinary rendition said today's report had "torn what's left of the government's policy on rendition to shreds".

The report was welcomed by human rights groups. Amnesty International UK head of policy Jeremy Croft said he shared the committee's concerns over the UK government's current counter-terrorism policy. "The UK government needs to take allegations of torture at Guantánamo and other US detention centres altogether more seriously."

He added: "The UK government must as a matter of urgency get to the bottom of whether there has been outsourcing' of torture of British nationals to Pakistan. This report should now add weight to our call for an independent and thorough investigation into any UK involvement in rendition' and torture in the war on terror'."

Noted academic and US political activist Noam Chomsky said: "I don't frankly see how anyone can even discuss trusting Bush-Cheney and company. For the UK political system, there would seem to be a prior question, at least for those who have read the Downing Street memos and followed other events with any care. And for everyone in the world there is a question prior to that: why should one blindly trust any system of power and authority on matters of human significance, where their interests are not hard to discern, abandoning our basic right and responsibility to maintain an open, skeptical, and critical mind?"

Ben Ward, Europe and Central Asia deputy director of Human Rights Watch, said: "The committee is saying it is the responsibility of the UK government to take a more positive and proactive approach to ensure that its actions are consistent with its human rights obligations. You can't just turn a blind eye and shield yourself from any culpability."

But, he added, the government has previously not embraced similar conclusions. "It's fair to say that the government hasn't been as receptive to criticism from parliamentary committees about the content of its counter-terrorism policies as we would like. They have listened, but they haven't previously acted upon the recommendations it has received, which is a matter of great regret."

The government welcomed the report, but declined to say what recommendations would be taken up.

Lord Malloch-Brown, minister of state in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, said: "I welcome the FAC's positive assessment of our 2007 Annual Human Rights report and their recognition that the UK shows leadership in many aspects of promoting human rights around the world.

"The FAC's scrutiny is an important element of the process of accountability and transparency in the FCO's work on human rights. We will carefully consider the committee's report and respond formally to them in due course."