Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministerial Statement

Uyghur Slave Labour: Xinjiang

16 December 2020 · 38 other contributors

Opened by Nigel Adams Con Selby and Ainsty

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

At a glance

Nigel Adams raised concerns about uyghur slave labour: xinjiang in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.

Key points

  • UK Parliament debated Uyghur Slave Labour: Xinjiang on 2020-12-16
  • Concerns raised during the debate are not recorded
  • No specific asks of the government are recorded

How the debate unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.

Other contributors (38)
  • Iain Duncan Smith Con Chingford and Woodford Green

    Question

    Let me make it clear that this question is not about being anti-Chinese—far from it. It is about the abuses of the dictatorial Chinese Communist Government and its ruling elite. On Monday, Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China adviser Adrian Zenz published research taken from internal Chinese Government files, which showed that in 2018 the prefectures of Aksu and Hotan sent 210,000 workers via coercive labour transfer to forcibly pick cotton for a Chinese paramilitary organisation, the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps. That is, in effect, slave labour. Furthermore, Mr Zenz and IPAC have also shown that the Chinese Government forced Uyghur women into sterilisation. As a result, the Uyghur population in those regions fell by as much as 84% between 2015 and 2018. That is action verging, I believe, on genocide. Meanwhile, the peaceful proponents of democracy in Hong Kong are locked up and forced to flee their homes; Christians and Falun Gong have suffered organ harvesting, while half a million Tibetans have been forced into labour camps. The Chinese Communist party is oppressive at home and bullying abroad—just look at its actions in bullying Australia for calling for an independent inquiry into the origins of covid, and the revelations over the weekend that supposedly secure institutions such as even the Foreign Office have been penetrated not only by CCP members, but by members of the fanatical United Front. The security issues are paramount. I ask my hon. Friend when he will announce that those responsible for all these evils will be sanctioned under the Magnitsky regimes. We have been going on and on about that, without answer. Will he commit to reviewing all our dependency on China and to putting that on a secure basis? May I ask what he is doing now about the penetration by those United Front entryists into the embassy and other secure institutions in the United Kingdom? Will his Department support the forthcoming genocide amendment that is now in the other place? I simply say to my hon. Friend that we must condemn—not just criticise, but condemn—the actions being taken by this abusive Government. We have learned in the past that appeasement does not work. That is why we must take this head-on, right now, before it becomes too big to manage.

    Minister reply

    I thank my right hon. Friend both for securing this urgent question and for the work he does with colleagues cross-party on this important issue. He raised the question of members of the CCP and United Front getting access to some of our institutions. First and foremost, we protect our most sensitive information by ensuring that local staff do not have access to it, regardless of whether they hold any party affiliation, and we undertake robust vetting of staff. We value the work of local staff immensely and they help to promote UK prosperity, but, as he knows, there are 91 million members of the Chinese Communist party; it is a mass-membership organisation at the heart of Chinese government, business, academia and social life. My right hon. Friend also raised the question of sanctions. Of course, that is an issue that we have discussed on a regular basis since announcing our regime in July. We are constantly and carefully considering further designations under that regime, and we will keep all potential listings under review. My right hon. Friend also asked about the amendment to the Trade Bill in the other place. Our commitment to upholding human rights and opposing genocide in all its forms is unequivocal. The Trade Bill applies only to trade agreements that have already been signed with the EU that we are rolling over as an independent trading nation. None of the agreements that we have signed, which have been scrutinised by Parliament, have eroded any domestic standards in relation to human rights or equalities.

  • Lisa Nandy Lab Wigan

    Question

    Yesterday, Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis described the treatment of the Uyghur people as an “unfathomable mass atrocity”. He added: “Let no person say that the responsibility lies with others.” The shocking BBC revelations must be the trigger for action, following accounts of forced sterilisations, beatings and re-education camps, which undeniably share features of genocide. Yesterday, it became clear that Britain is deeply involved in this story. We are tied to the Uyghur people through our global supply chains, importing cotton born of forced labour into our markets and, in doing so, unwittingly helping to sustain these appalling mass atrocities. I want to hear about action today. The Government must introduce Magnitsky sanctions and work with our allies to maximise their effect. Has the Minister discussed targeted sanctions with partners in North America, Europe and Australia? In October, the Foreign Secretary said he needed to “gather the evidence”, but by December no Xinjiang officials were included in the updated Magnitsky list. Without further evidence, we will not make progress, so how are the Government going to work with allies to pressure China to allow the UN access to Xinjiang? Has the Minister considered the use of the 1984 convention against torture, a potential international legal process that does not present the same jurisdictional challenges facing the International Criminal Court or face the same evidence bar? When the BBC asked British companies to confirm that cotton from Xinjiang was not used in their supply chains, only four were able to do so. If that does not fire our sense of urgency, what on earth will? The review of the Modern Slavery Act 2015 concluded that for many companies it was simply a “tick-box exercise”, with 40% not complying at all. It recommended enforcement and stronger processes. What are the Government waiting for? Can the Minister confirm today that no public body, whether it is the NHS, the armed forces or his own Department, uses cotton from Xinjiang? If he cannot, will he tell us what he is going to do to ensure that the Modern Slavery Act covers public bodies and that not a penny of public money is spent on allowing the mass persecution of the Uyghur to continue?

    Minister reply

    I thank the hon. Lady for her questions. I share the Chief Rabbi’s serious concerns about the gross violations of human rights that are being perpetrated against Uyghur Muslims—and other minorities, it is fair to say—in Xinjiang. The hon. Lady is right to mention the report. We have repeatedly urged businesses involved in investing in Xinjiang or with parts of their supply chains in the region to ensure that they conduct the appropriate due diligence—to ensure that those activities do not support human rights violations or abuses. We have reinforced that message through engagement with businesses, industry groups and other stakeholders. Of course we work internationally in our co-operation on these issues; we were able to pull together 39 countries at the UN to support our statement. On the Modern Slavery Act, incidentally, the UK is the first country in the world to require businesses to report on how they are tackling modern slavery in their operations. The Home Office has announced a series of measures to strengthen the Modern Slavery Act, including extending transparency obligations to certain public bodies, which the hon. Lady mentioned, and those measures will be introduced as soon as parliamentary time allows. I can also tell her that the FCDO is co-ordinating extensive further work across Government to address this deeply concerning issue, which we acknowledge.

  • Thomas Tugendhat Con Tonbridge

    Question

    Pays tribute to Adrian Zenz's report on Uyghur human rights violations. Calls for Magnitsky sanctions and support for businesses in tracking slave labour through supply chains.

    Minister reply

    Acknowledges the issue of forced labour and states that measures will be taken to strengthen the Modern Slavery Act, with cross-departmental work ongoing.

  • Question

    Congratulates the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green on bringing Uyghur rights violations to the House. Calls for a Government audit of UK companies involved in slavery and asks for cross-Government efforts statement.

    Minister reply

    States that an update will be provided in due course, likely early next year, while acknowledging the UK's pioneering role in requiring businesses to report on modern slavery.

  • Nusrat Ghani Con Sussex Weald

    Question

    Raises concerns about the abuse of Uyghur people and calls for an urgent independent investigation. Asks if the Chinese ambassador has been summoned.

    Minister reply

    Confirms that the permanent under-secretary met with the Chinese ambassador to express strong views on the situation following recent reports.

  • Layla Moran Lib Dem Oxford West and Abingdon

    Question

    Asks if a publicly available watchlist of companies linked to slave labour will be created, and suggests a total ban on products associated with human rights abuses.

    Minister reply

    Acknowledges ongoing meetings with businesses about forced labour issues and promises further action via the Modern Slavery Act 2015 next year.

  • Question

    Asks if there is a duty on strong nations to speak out against totalitarian states that violate human rights.

    Minister reply

    Agrees with the principle and notes the UK's leadership in getting 39 countries to join its statement at the third committee of the UN.

  • Jim Shannon DUP Strangford

    Question

    Calls for robust action against China, emphasising moral obligations to help persecuted people.

    Minister reply

    Acknowledges concerns about religious persecution and commitment to speaking out on such violations.

  • Question

    Supports the Government's approach but asks for an extension of the Magnitsky Act and recognition of the Uyghur tribunal.

    Minister reply

    Confirms ongoing liaison with relevant bodies, including discussions on potential sanctions.

  • Question

    Asks if stronger messages can be sent to China regarding investment in the UK and luxury shopping by Chinese politburo members.

    Minister reply

    Acknowledges importance of trade with China while stating that values and national interest will not be compromised.

  • Edward Leigh Con Gainsborough

    Question

    The House of Commons has historically supported the enslaved and persecuted in the world, urging the Minister to take action against China's use of slave labour for cotton picking. He also asks about pursuing Magnitsky sanctions and trade sanctions post-Brexit.

    Minister reply

    Mr Adams acknowledges Mr Leigh’s point, confirming new measures to strengthen the Modern Slavery Act will be introduced at an opportune moment.

  • Rachel Hopkins Lab Luton South and South Bedfordshire

    Question

    Ms Hopkins inquires about steps being taken by the Foreign Secretary to support the appointment of a UN special rapporteur for investigating forced labour and ethnic persecution in Xinjiang.

    Minister reply

    Mr Adams states that while they lead on this issue internationally, actions at the UN must have an opportunity of succeeding.

  • Christian Wakeford Lab Bury South

    Question

    Mr Wakeford raises concerns about the treatment of Uyghurs and asks for practical steps to hold China accountable.

    Minister reply

    Mr Adams assures Mr Wakeford that they are playing a leading role internationally in holding China to account, supporting multiple joint statements on this issue.

  • Question

    Ms Fellows questions if the UK will sacrifice its moral and ethical principles for economic gains with China and demands that human rights abuses in Xinjiang be a precondition for trade deals.

    Minister reply

    Mr Adams confirms they have high ambitions for their trade relationship but will not sacrifice values or security.

  • Andrew Gwynne Ind Gorton and Denton

    Question

    Mr Gwynne refers to the UN convention on genocide, inquiring about international actions beyond joint statements against human rights abuses.

    Minister reply

    Mr Adams acknowledges the importance of judicial decisions regarding crimes against humanity or genocide.

  • Alicia Kearns Con Rutland and Stamford

    Question

    Ms Kearns calls for an atrocity prevention unit within FCDO to pressure China on its reputation and economy.

    Minister reply

    Mr Adams agrees the international concern is vital, noting the increase from 28 to 39 countries supporting joint statements against China.

  • Navendu Mishra Lab Stockport

    Question

    Mr Mishra asks why it has taken FCDO so long to apply Magnitsky sanctions against Chinese officials responsible for human rights abuses.

    Minister reply

    Mr Adams explains they are carefully considering designations with evidence, ensuring asset flight does not occur.

  • Question

    Mr Johnston urges businesses to establish whether their products involve forced labour and cease using them if true.

    Minister reply

    Mr Adams agrees there is a role for both Government and business in ensuring supply chains are free of forced labour.

  • Andrew Murrison Con South West Wiltshire

    Question

    Mr Murrison asks the Minister to persuade international partners to look at national public procurement supply chains to ensure products do not involve forced labour.

    Minister reply

    Mr Adams assures Mr Murrison they are working cross-Government and with international partners on these issues.

  • Rushanara Ali Lab Bethnal Green and Stepney

    Question

    Ms Ali compares the situation to Myanmar's treatment of Rohingya Muslims, calling for immediate application of sanctions and a UN investigation.

    Minister reply

    Mr Adams acknowledges Ms Ali’s concerns but emphasises they are taking a lead internationally, noting rising support from other countries.

  • Kieran Mullan Con Bexhill and Battle

    Question

    I encourage the Minister to persuade our allies that tackling these issues now will be easier than waiting. How can we ensure UK companies do not benefit from slave labour?

    Minister reply

    We constantly urge businesses in Xinjiang to ensure their supply chains are free of forced labour and satisfy themselves they do not support it. We have financed projects to raise awareness of human rights violations.

  • Question

    Will the Minister legislate to require UK garment retailers to label if cotton is sourced from forced Uyghur labour in Xinjiang?

    Minister reply

    We are considering new measures on supply chains and will bring forward proposals in the new year. We continue to raise serious concerns about human rights violations.

  • Question

    Will my hon. Friend consider working with our international partners to seek a special resolution at the UN or establish a specialist tribunal for Uyghur Muslims?

    Minister reply

    We will continue to work with international partners in the UN, as suggested by the MP.

  • Question

    Will my hon. Friend look again at our relationship with China and not prioritise economic interests ahead of human rights?

    Minister reply

    We will not sacrifice values or security for trade benefits, despite the importance of trade relations.

  • Bob Blackman Con Harrow East

    Question

    When he sees the Chinese ambassador, will my hon. Friend urge him to accept the need for an independent investigation into the treatment and detention of Uyghur people?

    Minister reply

    We call repeatedly for unfettered access to Xinjiang by UN Human Rights Commissioner or another independent fact-finding body.

  • Liz Twist Lab Blaydon and Consett

    Question

    What conversations has the Minister had with his counterpart in China about Uyghur people's treatment, and to coordinate an international response?

    Minister reply

    We regularly have conversations on this issue, including 39 countries joining us at the UN and direct discussions with Chinese counterparts.

  • Question

    Will my hon. Friend commit to keeping up international pressure, in particular with the incoming US Administration?

    Minister reply

    We will keep up pressure working closely with our partners including the United States and their new Administration.

  • Matt Western Lab Warwick and Leamington

    Question

    What powers do the Government have under the Modern Slavery Act 2015, and why are they slow on China compared to Belarus with Magnitsky sanctions?

    Minister reply

    We consider designations carefully based on accurate evidence. We urge businesses involved in Xinjiang to ensure no products or supply chains involve forced labour; measures will be brought forward in the new year.

  • Question

    Will my hon. Friend agree that businesses should never profit from slavery and suffering, and outline steps taken to build an international coalition?

    Minister reply

    It is vital China understands international concern; our diplomatic focus has seen the number of countries joining us grow.

  • Rachael Maskell Lab Co-op York Central

    Question

    Could the Government be clearer on exactly what they are bringing forward and when, given 39 countries are clearly not enough to stop this human rights abuse?

    Minister reply

    We will bring forward changes to strengthen the Modern Slavery Act but parliamentary time must allow for this; patience is needed.

  • Jo Gideon Lab Stoke-on-Trent Central

    Question

    My constituents in Stoke-on-Trent Central are deeply concerned and shocked by reports of forced labour of the Uyghur people in Xinjiang. Britain’s Modern Slavery Act requires big businesses to detail their anti-slavery efforts annually; however, as my hon. Friend will know, well-meaning words fall short of action. What measures are the Government taking to ensure that UK businesses are not complicit in modern-day slavery?

    Minister reply

    My hon. Friend rightly raises the Modern Slavery Act. At the risk of repeating myself, I remind the House that we are the first country in the world to require businesses to report on how they are tackling modern slavery in their operations and supply chains. In September, the Home Office announced a series of measures to strengthen the Act, including extending the reporting requirement to public bodies with a budget of £36 million or more.

  • Patrick Grady SNP Glasgow North

    Question

    I wonder whether those requirements will apply to the many organisations that have been handed covid procurement contracts by the Minister’s ministerial colleagues to lots of their different friends. What steps are the Government taking specifically to ensure integrity in those supply chains?

    Minister reply

    We have taken steps to reduce our dependence on imported PPE. UK manufacturers can now provide 70% of all items of PPE except gloves, compared to just 1% before the pandemic. The FCDO is working through our embassy in Beijing to ensure external due diligence service providers carry out open source checks on Chinese suppliers of medical products produced during the peak of the covid epidemic.

  • Scott Benton Con NOT SPECIFIED

    Question

    I am sure that my hon. Friend will be absolutely appalled by the credible reports of forced abortions and forced sterilisation. Will he commit to taking action on this by formally and publicly condemning the population control practices of the Chinese Communist party and requesting that these cease immediately?

    Minister reply

    My hon. Friend is right to raise these abhorrent issues. We debated this earlier in the year when a report was made available. We will continue to hold China to account under its international obligations.

  • Jack Brereton Con Ruislip-Northwood

    Question

    China routinely breaches the international norms that we stand for, whether it be egregious trade practices, intellectual property or human rights issues such as those in Xinjiang. Will my hon. Friend outline the steps taken to raise our concerns directly with the Chinese Government?

    Minister reply

    Absolutely. Again, my hon. Friend is right to raise this matter. We did so yesterday directly with the Chinese embassy. The Foreign Secretary has raised serious concerns about the situation in Xinjiang directly with his counterpart on a number of occasions.

  • Kerry McCarthy Lab Bristol East

    Question

    It has been nearly two years since the Environmental Audit Committee published its report into fast fashion. During that inquiry, we heard disturbing evidence about practices in the cotton trade in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan and about bondage child labour in the cotton mills of Tamil Nadu, and there was also reference to prison camps in China as well. The Government rejected nearly all of our recommendations, including a requirement for due diligence checks on the supply chain. Does the Minister regard that as a missed opportunity, and what progress has been made in the past two years since that warning sign was raised by the Environmental Audit Committee?

    Minister reply

    The hon. Lady is right to raise this. We will be strengthening the Modern Slavery Act at the earliest opportunity when parliamentary time allows. Since the work that she refers to, we have also been carrying out extensive work across Government on this particular issue.

  • James Sunderland Con NOT SPECIFIED

    Question

    Given that the FCDO routinely engages with its Chinese counterparts, may I please ask the Minister what its reaction is when confronted with the evidence and whether diplomacy with China has any effect at all?

    Minister reply

    I can assure my hon. Friend that China does care deeply about its international reputation. We have seen China change its narrative in response to international pressure. Its vigorous protest against our multilateral activity suggests that it cares a great deal about the action that we are taking.

  • Dave Doogan SNP Angus and Perthshire Glens

    Question

    Given the growing concern over the impact of disinformation emanating from Confucius Institutes, including efforts to deny that which is patently happening in Xinjiang, will the Minister and his Government colleagues be reviewing the presence of those institutions in the UK with a view to limiting their influence?

    Minister reply

    The hon. Gentleman raises a very good point. A number of UK higher education providers host Confucius Institutes, and are responsible for ensuring that their partnerships are managed appropriately with the right due diligence in place. We take seriously any concerns regarding the operation of international organisations at those education providers.

Shadow Comment

Iain Duncan Smith

Let me make it clear that this question is not about being anti-Chinese—far from it. It is about the abuses of the dictatorial Chinese Communist Government and its ruling elite. On Monday, Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China adviser Adrian Zenz published research taken from internal Chinese Government files, which showed that in 2018 the prefectures of Aksu and Hotan sent 210,000 workers via coercive labour transfer to forcibly pick cotton for a Chinese paramilitary organisation, the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps. That is, in effect, slave labour. Furthermore, Mr Zenz and IPAC have also shown that the Chinese Government forced Uyghur women into sterilisation. As a result, the Uyghur population in those regions fell by as much as 84% between 2015 and 2018. That is action verging, I believe, on genocide. Meanwhile, the peaceful proponents of democracy in Hong Kong are locked up and forced to flee their homes; Christians and Falun Gong have suffered organ harvesting, while half a million Tibetans have been forced into labour camps. The Chinese Communist party is oppressive at home and bullying abroad—just look at its actions in bullying Australia for calling for an independent inquiry into the origins of covid, and the revelations over the weekend that supposedly secure institutions such as even the Foreign Office have been penetrated not only by CCP members, but by members of the fanatical United Front. The security issues are paramount. I ask my hon. Friend when he will announce that those responsible for all these evils will be sanctioned under the Magnitsky regimes. We have been going on and on about that, without answer. Will he commit to reviewing all our dependency on China and to putting that on a secure basis? May I ask what he is doing now about the penetration by those United Front entryists into the embassy and other secure institutions in the United Kingdom? Will his Department support the forthcoming genocide amendment that is now in the other place? I simply say to my hon. Friend that we must condemn—not just criticise, but condemn—the actions being taken by this abusive Government. We have learned in the past that appeasement does not work. That is why we must take this head-on, right now, before it becomes too big to manage.

▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy