House of Commons · Bill Debate
28 April 2021 · 3 other contributors
Opened by Paul Scully Con Bromley & Chislehurst
Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.
Paul Scully raised concerns about national security and investment bill - clause 61 in the House of Commons. Other MPs contributed to the debate.
Key points
Key requests to Government
Question put, That this House disagrees with Lords amendments 11B and 11C.
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.
Opened the debate
MP Paul Scully moves to disagree with Lords amendments 11B and 11C, which concern reporting requirements for the Intelligence and Security Committee regarding national security. He argues that these amendments are neither necessary nor appropriate since scrutiny by BEIS committees can be sufficient and ongoing efforts to ensure proper oversight are underway.
Chi Onwurah supports the Lords amendments, arguing that BEIS lacks national security experience and cannot provide adequate scrutiny of critical decisions. She emphasises that classified information shared with BEIS could lead to breaches, highlighting the need for ISC oversight as the best mechanism for parliamentary scrutiny on national security matters.
Owen Thompson briefly supports the principle of the Bill but raises concerns over insufficient scrutiny. He calls upon the Government to heed previous comments and fully consider the need for robust oversight mechanisms, including ISC scrutiny.
In response to opposition arguments, Paul Scully reiterates that BEIS can effectively handle sensitive information and provides assurances on how classified information will be shared with the BEIS Committee. He also emphasises the current framework for national security oversight under existing Acts.