China: Breach of UK Parliamentarians’ Data
Dan Jarvis's opening reply
Questions
- RED (23/100) Sir Iain Duncan Smith
-
RED (20/100)
Emily Darlington
I appreciate that the Minister cannot talk about security matters, so I shall try to broaden the question, and will hopefully receive a clearer response. It is obvious that agents of the Chinese Government, and the Chinese Government themselves, are targeting pro-democracy campaigners, whether they sit in Parliament, are citizens of Britain or are in Hong Kong. Just this week we saw that Joshua Wong had been sentenced to 10 years in prison for standing up for democracy in Hong Kong, and we have seen the transnational repression of British national overseas passport holders and UK citizens here on our streets. Will the Government summon the Chinese ambassador to talk about the case reported in the Daily Mail and the transnational repression, as well as calling for Joshua Wong’s release, which they did for Jimmy Lai? Will they sanction those responsible for the national security law prosecutions, as the United States has? Will the Minister be able to tell Parliament what further consequences will follow if the Chinese Government do not start to behave differently towards the UK and will not release Joshua Wong and Jimmy Lai?
- RED (4/100) Alicia Kearns 20% point-scoring
-
AMBER (38/100)
Chris Murray
The threat that this country faces from hostile state actors is of grave concern to Members and parties on both sides of the House, and the security of parliamentarians as they go about their roles is central to democracy. A key component of countering political interference in our democracy is the foreign influence registration scheme. I welcome the Minister’s comments, but can he say more about the funding that is going into tackling hostile state threats? Will he confirm that the foreign influence registration scheme is being operationalised, and will he commit to not politicising the security of parliamentarians, unlike, I am afraid to say, the Opposition?
- RED (18/100) Max Wilkinson
-
AMBER (30/100)
Deirdre Costigan
100% vibes
Members across this place know personally about espionage risks to our democracy, and I know that that is true of the shadow Security Minister. Does my right hon. Friend agree that we must all be vigilant as we go about our work in this place?
-
RED (18/100)
Priti Patel
The evidence that China poses a threat to our national security and democracy is clearly overwhelming. We have spent a lot of time discussing this matter in the House, including the threats to parliamentarians and the overall security threat. The Minister has spoken in glowing terms about the foreign influence registration scheme, which the Government introduced, and said that it is working. Can he give an explanation to this House as to why China is not on the enhanced tier of FIRS?
-
AMBER (27/100)
DEFERRED
Luke Taylor
The Minister must now recognise the scale and sophistication of the Chinese Communist party’s efforts to undermine our country, this House and the security of Hongkongers who settled here to flee persecution. Despite that, last week the Home Secretary rather flippantly referred to Hongkongers needing to prove their lack of criminality to achieve settlement. It is, of course, vital that no one who is a criminal enters our country, but as we saw in the case of Wu Chi-wai earlier this year, the Home Office has treated a criminal record incurred under the anti-democratic national security law as grounds for refusal. Does the Minister accept that the Home Secretary’s remarks were clumsy and commit to working across Government to ensure that instructions are issued to immigration officials to fix that practice and ensure that Hongkongers fleeing CCP persecution are protected?
-
RED (15/100)
Sir Alec Shelbrooke
Our colleague, the Chairman of Ways and Means—I notified her that I was going to mention her—is sanctioned by China. She was sanctioned because she constantly raised the horrific human rights abuses against the Uyghurs. The Minister is pointing out all the reasons why he cannot answer questions and cannot say anything, but one thing he could do is to say to the new Prime Minister and the new Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero that, having said there would be an ethical procurement policy, there should be a pause on processed renewables materials that come from China, because there appears to be plenty of evidence that human rights abuses of the Uyghurs are taking place to produce them. Will he commit to doing that?
-
RED (18/100)
Chris Law
While it is unacceptable that Members of this Parliament are under constant hostile threat from foreign states, it is also unacceptable that this Government are unwilling to offer protection by taking appropriate action against China. Despite the CCP sanctioning, spying on and now accessing the phone and financial records of parliamentarians, the Government still refuse to publish the China audit in full or to publish any strategy on how to deal with this threat. Why, given all the evidence, have the Government not finally added China to the enhanced tier of FIRS? I draw attention to the fact that the Minister has dodged that question up to now. Given that the revelations we are talking about today happened in 2021, can he confirm whether a full UK investigation, alongside the FBI investigation, is now taking place?
-
RED (22/100)
Bradley Thomas
Every Member of this House should be concerned about this affront to democracy, because the threat from China is incredibly well documented. Current and former heads of the security services have talked prominently about the threat from China and foreign Governments. We have industrial espionage and Chinese activity aimed at infiltrating our energy systems. We could not be clearer-eyed than we are, so what more has to happen before the Government put China on the enhanced tier of FIRS? Week after week, we get reports of industrial espionage, hacking and threats to democracy. What has to happen before the Government finally acknowledge that China should be on the enhanced tier?
-
RED (8/100)
Jim Shannon
The targeted harvesting of phone and financial records appears to be part of a co-ordinated campaign of transnational repression against critics of Beijing. Given this escalatory behaviour, will the Minister review the powers available to our intelligence services to disrupt the commercial proxies, and state plainly what consequences the People’s Republic of China will face for executing operations against sitting British parliamentarians, bearing in mind that the website of the all-party parliamentary group for international freedom of religion or belief, which I chair, was hacked, and articles were replaced with pro-China propaganda? Quite clearly, that is something that we would never have agreed to.