-
Question
The Crown Prosecution Service withdrew charges against Christopher Cash and Christopher Berry despite meeting legal thresholds last year. What has changed between then and now?
Minister reply
While the Minister did not provide a direct answer in the provided transcript, he emphasised the Government's continued concern about Chinese espionage and their robust measures to counter it under the new National Security Act 2023.
-
Question
How can we square the Government's decision to reintroduce extradition arrangements with Hong Kong, despite the Chinese security Act, with today’s statement on China?
Minister reply
The Government respects the relationship with Hongkongers. No one will be extradited for political expediency. The UK takes transnational repression seriously and works closely with international allies to ensure it is a hard target for such threats.
-
Question
What specific issues led the CPS to drop charges against two men accused of serious offences under the Official Secrets Act?
Minister reply
It would be inappropriate to speculate on reasons for CPS decisions, as they are independent. However, the Government ensures security agencies have necessary tools and resources.
-
Question
What discussions has the UK had with allies about this challenge? When will guidance be issued to MPs on protective security?
Minister reply
The UK works closely with Five Eyes nations and other international co-operation arrangements. Guidance for Members of Parliament is being prepared and will be issued as soon as possible.
-
Question
Has an assessment been made on whether charges would proceed under the new National Security Act?
Minister reply
The Government is looking closely at the decision and ensuring that it has all necessary powers to guard against security threats.
-
Question
The Member thanked Mr Speaker for his support over the past two years, expressed relief that the National Security Act will make it easier to prosecute foreign spies, but urged reform of the Treason Act and a reassessment of China's tier status. She questioned why Chris Cash and Christopher Berry could not be prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act despite overwhelming evidence.
Minister reply
The Minister acknowledged the Hon Lady’s concerns, expressed his understanding of her perspective, and agreed to review the points made regarding treason. He stated that he would work closely with her and other Members to seek meetings with the CPS at the earliest opportunity to better understand its decision-making process.
-
Question
The Member raised fears of the Hong Kong community in Bracknell due to Chinese state influence and asked if the Government will safeguard the British National Overseas visa route, recognising the historic commitment towards this community.
Minister reply
The Minister confirmed his understanding of these fears and stated that he would work with colleagues in the Department to ensure protection for those from Hong Kong who feel at risk. He assured that the Government’s commitment is to protect those communities.
-
Question
The Member, having been sanctioned by Chinese authorities, highlighted the security services’ clear assessment of a slam-dunk prosecution case. He criticised the Government for not raising China to an upper-tier threat level.
Minister reply
Acknowledging the right hon Gentleman’s longstanding interest in these matters, the Minister stated that this Government takes threats seriously regardless of origin and categorically assured Parliament that national security is their first duty.
-
Question
The Member criticised signals sent by the Government’s position on China, including its super-embassy and foreign influence registration scheme.
Minister reply
The Minister stated that this Government will send only one signal: that threats to our country will not be tolerated.
-
Question
The Member highlighted China’s breaches of international agreements, placement of bounties on Hongkongers seeking refuge in the UK, and asked if all relevant officials would be placed in the enhanced tier of the foreign influence registration scheme.
Minister reply
The Minister acknowledged the Hon Member's concerns but assured that incidents described were condemned by the UK Government at the time. He stated that decisions about further nations to include on the enhanced tier will be made in due course.
-
Question
The Member criticised the description of relations with China as complex and highlighted espionage, malign behaviour, and trade imbalance issues.
Minister reply
The Minister responded by stating that threats to our country will not be tolerated.
-
Question
There is a very nasty smell about the collapse of this Chinese spying affair case. Just over a year ago, the Crown Prosecution Service counter-terrorism unit said after complex investigations that these were very serious allegations and that charges were brought, but now we are supposed to believe that it cannot provide any evidence whatsoever. It feels to me as if one of two things has happened here: either the CPS was wrong or someone high up in the Government interfered with this situation. Which is it, Minister?
Minister reply
When the hon. Member takes a moment to think carefully about these things, he will understand that Government Ministers should not speculate on the reasons provided for a particular decision by the Crown Prosecution Service, which is independent of Government. It would be entirely improper for any Minister to do that.
-
Question
The Security Minister mentioned the Official Secrets Act 1911, but he will know that it was updated in 1920 and, indeed, in 1989. As one of the co-authors of the Intelligence and Security Committee’s China report, following the comments of my right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith), that report highlighted China as a threat, not a challenge. Is it not time that with more power and funding going to the Intelligence and Security Committee —with even more responsibility being put on it—it should be given more powers so that this Parliament and the people we represent know there is proper democratic parliamentary oversight of the intelligence community in this country?
Minister reply
I am grateful to the right hon. Member for his remarks, as well as the work he has done in this area and his service on the Committee. As a former Committee member, he will understand that the Committee is fiercely independent of Government, and rightly so, but I happen to think it does an outstanding job.
-
Question
The Minister is clearly not happy with the CPS’s decision, and therefore the Government are not, and the House is obviously not either. Because the two suspects did not face a trial, double jeopardy does not come into play. Will the Minister undertake to explore with the Attorney General the scope for him to bring a case against those two, if not under the Official Secrets Act to test the case with a jury, then under the new legislation, which clearly would present no problem in court terms?
Minister reply
I certainly agree with the hon. Member in his assessment of my being not happy. The decision was communicated this morning. The points he raised were reasonable, constructive and helpful, so let me take them away and consider them with colleagues across Government.
-
Question
The Minister has repeatedly said that it is not his job to speculate on the CPS. He is right, but it is his job to defend the security of this country and therefore to ask the CPS why it has not brought charges. Has he done that? Has he rung the CPS before he came to the House to speak to it and to understand why it has not gone ahead?
Minister reply
I accept the charge the hon. Gentleman makes against me that it is my responsibility to defend our national security, and I hope he understands that that is something I take incredibly seriously. The decision was communicated this morning. This was an independent decision, but I give him and others an assurance that we will, of course, look incredibly closely at it.
-
Question
In early June, the Government told me that the report regarding the inclusion of China in the enhanced tier would come forward in due course. As the Minister said in his statement, the chargé d’affaires at the Chinese embassy has now been démarched. Can the Minister outline why China has not been included in the enhanced tier of the foreign influence registration scheme?
Minister reply
We are not doing what the hon. Gentleman suggests we are. What we are seeking to do is ensure that we have all the right tools to guard against the nature of the threats that we face. We take that incredibly seriously.
-
Question
Is the alarming takeaway from this, both for this House and for any potential spy, that we are being asked to believe that the espionage in which Messrs Cash and Berry engaged is not a criminal offence? Is that where our defence of national security has got to?
Minister reply
The takeaway is that the CPS made an independent decision this morning, and that this Government will do everything we can to keep the country safe.
-
Question
While I welcome the improved legislation in place to deal with the issue, the fact of the matter is that once again—the Government are being seen nationally as weak on criminal activity, and particularly on the action of the three defendants. When will the Government remind the world that this great nation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, is a strong nation that meets our enemies face to face and on any footing?
Minister reply
I hold the hon. Gentleman in the highest regard, so I hope that he will not mind me gently pointing out to him that I could not have been clearer in my earlier remarks about how seriously we take these issues.