-
Question
The shadow Home Secretary asks for assurances regarding the security of critical data cables near the proposed embassy site and questions how the decision-maker could have assessed risks without seeing unredacted plans. He also inquires about the ISC's access to these plans and its assessment of national security risks, including future developments.
Minister reply
The minister reassures that extensive measures are in place to protect sensitive data and ensure public safety. While he did not explicitly address all specific concerns raised by the shadow Home Secretary regarding unredacted plans or future risk management, he emphasised the robust nature of security mitigations developed through collaboration with intelligence agencies.
-
Question
Many of my constituents have concerns about the proposed new embassy, including human rights issues, espionage, and local disruption. What assurances can the Government provide to residents regarding their concerns?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend is an assiduous Member who represents her constituents seriously. While there are limits to what I can say about specific measures due to obvious reasons, we will work closely with her to minimise any disruption and would be happy to discuss further.
-
Question
How will the Government ensure rigorous monitoring and enforcement of planning conditions given the security concerns? Will all Chinese officials be included in the foreign influence registration scheme?
Minister reply
The security services have scrutinised the plans, and measures are being implemented to protect sensitive data. We cannot provide specific technical details due to security reasons but can assure that extensive measures are in place for national security.
-
Question
What does the Minister mean by 'additional resilience measures'?
Minister reply
It would be unwise to get into technical details of the mitigations we are seeking. The hon. Member should understand that as Security Minister, I cannot disclose specifics for obvious reasons.
-
Question
The MP acknowledges that these are complex decisions and highlights significant restrictions on what can be said in the Chamber. He seeks assurances regarding updates about changes in risk assessments.
Minister reply
I give him the assurances he seeks, committing to continue engaging with the ISC constructively and updating the House when necessary.
-
Question
The Vice-Chair of the ISC reports on their investigation into security implications, stating that national security concerns can be satisfactorily mitigated but highlights issues with process.
Minister reply
I thank the right hon. and learned Gentleman for his report and am willing to discuss process improvements with him and his Committee.
-
Question
The MP supports the ISC's conclusions about national security concerns being mitigated and questions the Minister on a letter from GCHQ and MI5 heads.
Minister reply
I reiterate points made about process and acknowledge the professional integrity of GCHQ and MI5 directors.
-
Question
The MP questions whether this is a propaganda win for China, challenging the Government's decision-making process.
Minister reply
I respectfully disagree with his point about it being a propaganda win and highlight the reduction of China’s diplomatic footprint in London.
-
Question
The MP asks for assurances to protect Hongkongers from transnational repression given by the new embassy.
Minister reply
I assure my hon. Friend that we take these matters seriously and have established a taskforce to address them, while emphasising operational benefits of consolidation.
-
Question
The MP raises concerns about UK citizens visiting the medieval monastery on the site being frisked and effectively in China.
Minister reply
I acknowledge his point and reiterate that bounties are unacceptable, while emphasising that we have carefully considered these issues.
-
Question
Hongkongers and other Chinese dissidents in the UK will be rightly concerned about this news. I want to make it completely clear that the Liberal Democrats have serious concerns that this project will enhance China’s ability to conduct transnational repression against Britons and Hongkongers on British soil. What is the timeline for closing the seven existing Chinese consulate buildings, once Royal Mint Court is opened?
Minister reply
The hon. Gentleman has expressed an opinion, and he is entirely within his rights to do that, but I hope he understands that I am also entirely within my rights to point out that his opinion is not backed up by the intelligence services or the security agencies. He states baldly that the proposed embassy site will deliver additional capability to China, but I again make the point about consolidation and the security advantages that we think will accrue from this proposal.
-
Question
I want first to make it clear that I do not agree with this decision. It will have a chilling effect on Tibetans, Hongkongers and Uyghurs, and other Chinese people who merely dissent from the regime in Beijing. What guarantees do the Government have that the seven other sites will be closed and disposed of?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend has a long and proud track record in this area, and I listen carefully to what he has to say. He will forgive me if I disagree with his analysis of the chilling effect of this decision, not least given the points about consolidation and the security advantage. Let me give him and the House an absolute assurance that that is part of the deal agreed with China.
-
Question
When the Secretary of State issued his letter, he said—this was quoted earlier—that the concern about cables should not present a problem for “a lawful embassy use”. Nothing about the Chinese is lawful here in the United Kingdom. Is it lawful for them to attack Hongkongers who have fled here?
Minister reply
Try though I might, there was never going to be a scenario where I would be able to satisfy the right hon. Gentleman today in what I have been able to say. He and I have had exchanges on these matters on many occasions.
-
Question
Will the Minister confirm that the UK Government are happy with rewarding and emboldening a nation that has one of the worst human rights records, that conducts espionage on these islands and in our Parliament?
Minister reply
I am sorry to say that I do not agree with the framing of the hon. Gentleman’s question. While he is entirely right to raise specific concerns, this is not about rewarding China.
-
Question
Will the Minister explain how, by giving China the embassy it wants, the Government are demonstrating that they are holding China responsible for—in his words—“unacceptable behaviour” that they will not stand for?
Minister reply
In part, it is because of the reduction in the diplomatic estate from seven sites to one.
-
Question
The Minister admits that they are a national security threat, yet the Government think it is a good idea to kowtow to the Beijing bullies and allow this mega-embassy. If the decision is in the national economic interest, could the Minister confirm that some British steel might be used in this Chinese embassy?
Minister reply
I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on getting the clip that he no doubt will be posting on social media in the not-too-distant future; that is up to him.
-
Question
There is a pattern of behaviour here: the failure to act meaningfully over Jimmy Lai, the mysterious collapse of the Chinese spy case and now this abject national humiliation. Let’s call this what it is: this is appeasement of communist China for economic gain.
Minister reply
The right hon. Gentleman might roll his eyes, but he was a Minister in the previous Government, and he will know that under his Conservative Government there was a complete lack of consistency with regard to our policy on China.
-
Question
Does the Minister believe that the approval of this Chinese mega-embassy makes the British people safer?
Minister reply
The right hon. Gentleman is very experienced from his own time in government, and he will know that difficult decisions have to be made. It is my judgment that, ultimately, this is the right way to proceed and that we have to engage with China for the reasons I have explained.
-
Question
Last week, I made it clear that any hostile intelligence service would struggle to find a better location for espionage than the now approved Chinese mega-embassy. What assessment has been made of the risk that this site could be used for surveillance, intimidation or coercion of critics of the oppressive communist regime who are living in the UK?
Minister reply
I am grateful for the points the hon. Lady has made, but of course, we are already dealing with those challenges. Some Members seem to think that we do not have to mitigate and manage those risks at the moment.
-
Question
China is notoriously transactional in its international relations, so what do we get in return?
Minister reply
I always listen carefully to the right hon. Gentleman, not least because I seem to remember that he was the Parliamentary Private Secretary to the then Prime Minister, Lord Cameron.
-
Question
In the light of what you have said, Madam Deputy Speaker, I hope that you see this as short question and I hope that I get a short answer. Does the Minister know if the security services have any concerns at all about this decision?
Minister reply
Fundamentally, Government are there to make the British people safer. For the reasons that I have explained, I am confident that this is the right decision from a national security perspective.
-
Question
Is not the plain truth that this was a predetermined political decision from the moment that the political decision was taken to call it in, when the Government were faced with due process because the council had refused the planning application?
Minister reply
I do not agree with the hon. and learned Gentleman’s analysis. I have been crystal clear that people are entitled to their opinions and will have different views.
-
Question
Let me point out that when the previous Conservative Government proclaimed a “golden era” of relations with China—when David Cameron welcomed President Xi for a state visit in 2015, as Theresa May was championing Huawei for our 5G infrastructure—the security services supported their then Prime Minister; or they were brought into line, which I expect is what happens under these circumstances.
Minister reply
I know that the hon. Gentleman gives a lot of thought and dedication to these matters. He reflected on the engagement that had taken place under the previous Government.
-
Question
The Minister says that China continues to pose a risk, and yet the Government today welcome this Trojan horse of an embassy into the heart of our capital. Consolidation helps China, not us, and planning conditions deal with the establishment but not the actual real use inside the building in years to come.
Minister reply
I do not agree with the hon. Lady’s analysis with regard to consolidation.
-
Question
The Government’s decision to approve China’s spy embassy is utterly wrong and puts national security at risk. Now that the embassy has been approved, if—or rather when—we get evidence that China is using the embassy for surveillance, torture or other inappropriate means, will the Government guarantee to close that embassy?
Minister reply
As with any embassy, either in this country or around the world—let us not be naive about the fact that Britain has embassies right around the world—the Vienna convention lays down the way in which different Governments should behave with regard to the conduct of their diplomatic presences.
-
Question
The Minister will be pleased to know that I am not going to ask him about the FIRS, but he quoted extensively from the weighty tome of the planning approval letter. It says that the Secretary of State notes that no bodies with responsibility for national security have raised concerns.
Minister reply
I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman’s analysis and I think it is quite wrong.
-
Question
Does the Minister not recognise that this decision lacks legal foundation? What is the basis for his actions?
Minister reply
I appreciate Mr. Jenrick's concern, but I have a very good response prepared on the legal aspects of our decisions which I will provide in due course.