← Back to House of Commons Debates
Human Rights Update
22 March 2021
Lead MP
Dominic Raab
Debate Type
Ministerial Statement
Tags
Policing & ResourcesEconomyTaxationForeign AffairsScience & TechnologyChildren & Families
Other Contributors: 34
At a Glance
Dominic Raab raised concerns about human rights update in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Government Statement
Policing & ResourcesEconomyTaxationForeign AffairsScience & TechnologyChildren & Families
Government Statement
With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement about the treatment of the Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang. This is one of the worst human rights crises of our time, according to evidence including satellite imagery, survivor testimony, official documentation and leaks from the Chinese Government themselves; credible open-source reporting, including from Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International; and visits by British diplomats to the region that have corroborated other reports about the targeting of specific ethnic groups. In sum, the evidence points to a highly disturbing programme of repression, with expressions of religion criminalised and Uyghur language and culture discriminated against on a systematic scale. There is widespread use of forced labour; women forcibly sterilised; children separated from their parents; an entire population subject to surveillance, including collection of DNA and use of facial recognition software and so-called predictive policing algorithms. State control in the region is systemic, with over 1 million people detained without trial. There are widespread claims of torture and rape in the camps based on first-hand survivor testimony. People are detained for having too many children, praying too much, wearing a beard or headscarf, or having the wrong thoughts. The international community cannot simply look the other way. In January, I announced a package of measures to help ensure that no British organisations—Government or private sector—deliberately or inadvertently can profit from human rights violations against the Uyghurs or other minorities, and that no businesses connected with the internment camps can do business in the UK. Today, we are taking further steps by designating four senior individuals responsible for violations and the Public Security Bureau of the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps; sanctions involve travel bans and asset freezes. We take this action alongside the EU, the US and Canada, sending a clear message to China that the international community will not turn a blind eye to serious human rights violations.
Gareth Johnson
Con
Dartford
Question
Does the Foreign Secretary agree that it would be a grave error for any Government to seek a trade deal with China at the expense of human rights?
Minister reply
The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. The United Kingdom has a proud record of standing up for our values around the world, and we will continue to do so.
Stephen Kinnock
Lab
Aberavon
Question
Does the Secretary of State agree that it is essential for the Government to show leadership in addressing the human rights abuses in Xinjiang? And does he also recognise the importance of upholding the joint declaration on Hong Kong?
Minister reply
The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. We will continue to press China on its commitments under the Sino-British Joint Declaration and on its actions in Hong Kong.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Question
Given what we have heard today about the abuse of Uyghur Muslims, can the Secretary of State confirm that his Department will take action to ensure that any goods produced by forced labour in Xinjiang do not enter our country?
Minister reply
The hon. Gentleman is right to highlight this issue, and it is one of the reasons why we have announced a package of measures to tackle forced labour.
Chuka Umunna
Lab
Stretford and Urmston
Question
Does the Secretary of State agree that the Government’s trade deal with China will exacerbate the very human rights abuses that he has just been condemning?
Minister reply
We are determined to tackle forced labour, which is one reason why we have introduced new legislation on this issue.
Diana Johnson
Lab
Kingston upon Hull North
Question
Does the Secretary of State recognise that if we do not take strong action now, the number of people in detention camps could rise from 1 million to 2 million?
Minister reply
That is a disturbing possibility and one reason why we have taken this action today.
Lisa Nandy
Lab
Wigan
Question
The MP welcomes the move but criticises the timing as grubby and cynical, highlighting inconsistencies in previous actions. She questions why sanctions were not taken earlier despite mounting evidence.
Minister reply
The Foreign Secretary corrects false statements made by the shadow, indicating that her welcome to the step does not align with subsequent criticisms.
Thomas Tugendhat
Con
Tonbridge
Question
The MP asks why the term 'genocide' is avoided and seeks clarification on the plans for a foreign agents registration Act.
Minister reply
The Foreign Secretary thanks his hon. Friend and confirms that further legislation will be discussed at an appropriate time.
Chris Law
SNP
Dundee Central
Question
The MP condemns human rights violations in China, questioning the UK's inconsistency on human rights and trade deals. He also seeks specific actions from the Foreign Secretary.
Minister reply
The Foreign Secretary criticises the MP’s remarks as nonsense, highlighting measures under the Modern Slavery Act 2015 and Magnitsky sanctions.
Question
The MP thanks the Foreign Secretary for the statement and highlights the significance of working with other countries against authoritarian regimes.
Minister reply
The Minister agrees, emphasising the importance of taking action in concert with 30 other countries to have a greater impact.
Jeremy Corbyn
Ind
Islington North
Question
The MP thanks the Foreign Secretary and asks about actions against profits made by British companies from manufacturing in Xinjiang, and inclusion of UN requests on discrimination.
Minister reply
The Minister confirms requirements under the Modern Slavery Act 2015 for transparency in supply chains apply across the board and highlights willingness to fine non-compliant businesses.
Chingford and Woodford Green
Question
What China has been doing to the Uyghur people and others, including the Tibetans, is nothing short of absolutely appalling. Will my right hon. Friend please take into consideration two names: Chen Quanguo, the architect of what is going on in Tibet and Xinjiang, and President Xi Jinping?
Minister reply
I thank my right hon. Friend for his campaigning efforts. I will certainly look at any names he has. We have a clear legal regime based on which we assess evidence and are willing to call out those responsible.
Alistair Carmichael
Lib Dem
Orkney and Shetland
Question
May I say that while the Foreign Secretary is on a roll, we might possibly see some positive announcement on the Alton amendment later today? Will he also give urgent consideration to the recent report from the Select Committee on Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy about tackling Uyghur slavery in supply chains?
Minister reply
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for welcoming our action today. We take action on supply chains, often following the money to cut off those profiting from internment camps.
Question
What steps are he and the UK Government taking with our Five Eyes partners to co-ordinate a response to China’s human rights abuses?
Minister reply
We have taken action with Canadian, US, Australian counterparts and engaged closely with New Zealand. The EU is important but we need to broaden the caucus of countries that will take action.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Question
Following the latest news that the EU has imposed sanctions on Chinese officials, will the Secretary of State outline what discussions have taken place with global powers to send a joint message that the removal of children from their parents and their being sent to orphan camps will not be tolerated by the global community?
Minister reply
I thank the hon. Gentleman. We are taking sanctions partly in response to the evidence related to these violations, which clearly violate basic human rights protected under domestic law and international human rights law.
Question
What steps has he taken to rally further international support for action on Xinjiang? Does he agree that China can be considered a leading member of the international community only if it abides by basic human rights norms?
Minister reply
I thank my hon. Friend. We need to swell the numbers of countries taking this stance and hold China accountable for its obligations as a permanent member of the Security Council.
Question
Will he now commit to strengthening section 54 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015 to stop forced labour being supported by UK business supply chains completely?
Minister reply
I thank the hon. Gentleman for welcoming our measures today. We have taken action and if there is a specific further piece of action that he would like us to take, he should write to me or to the Home Secretary.
Question
Does my right hon. Friend agree that China will be considered a leading member of the international community only if it abides by basic human rights norms in its day-to-day business?
Minister reply
My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. A positive, constructive relationship with China depends on what China does and whether it respects the basic tenets that come with its status.
Stephen Flynn
SNP
Aberdeen South
Question
At what point will China’s repeated human rights abuses become a barrier to trade?
Minister reply
We have been pretty clear that there are no realistic prospects of a free trade deal on the horizon. However, the best route to engaging more deeply with China on trade is for China to improve its human rights record.
Kieran Mullan
Con
Bexhill and Battle
Question
Does my right hon. Friend welcome the recent revival of the quadrilateral security dialogue, and does he agree with the Australian Prime Minister that the largely benign security environment in the region has gone?
Minister reply
I am in very close co-ordination with my Australian opposite number. We work closely on this issue and will continue to deepen and expand our collaboration.
Emma Hardy
Lab
Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice
Question
Does he still feel it will be appropriate to hold the winter 2022 Olympics in Beijing?
Minister reply
The hon. Lady raises a perfectly legitimate question, but this is an independent decision made by sporting authorities, not the Government.
Question
Does the Foreign Secretary agree that for Beijing’s denials to have even a shred of credibility, China must give the UN Commissioner for Human Rights full access to Xinjiang immediately?
Minister reply
I thank my hon. Friend. The UK, alongside the US and Canada, has reiterated calls for precisely this.
Question
Will the Government now automatically grant refugee status to all Uyghur people fleeing to the UK?
Minister reply
I thank the hon. Gentleman. Asylum applications are done independently, rather than on a political whim. Tribunals must make judgments based on specific legal definitions.
Tim Loughton
Con
East Worthing and Shoreham
Question
I welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement today, but it is one element of so much more that needs to be done. Everything he referred to as industrial scale assaults on human rights against the Uyghurs has been committed by the Chinese Government against the Tibetans since 1959 until recently by Chen Quanguo who brought ethnic stability, or what we know as ethnic cleansing, to Tibet and is now bringing genocide to Xinjiang. So why is he not on the list? And when our Five Eyes partners have referred to this as genocide, and many other countries are considering doing so, why can we not call it out for what it is: genocide?
Minister reply
The reality is that genocide has a very complex legal definition which is why in war crimes tribunals since Nuremberg, it has very rarely been found. The right thing to do is to respect the legal definition and allow a court to make those determinations.
Warrington North
Question
The Foreign Secretary said in January that we should not be doing trade deals with countries committing human rights abuses ‘well below the level of genocide’. Yet now, he has been caught on record saying that he is happy for the Government to do trade deals with countries who fail to meet international human rights standards. Indeed, just this month we have signed one with Cameroon. Is the Foreign Secretary concerned that he has been misleading the House?
Minister reply
I am not sure what is left of the question but the reality is that it is a totally inaccurate reflection—I am sure inadvertently—of the remarks we have made. I made it clear that we will never do free trade deals with countries whose human rights records are beyond the pale.
Nusrat Ghani
Con
Sussex Weald
Question
I welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement word for word and, of course, the sanctions that so many of us have argued for for so long. I will cut to the chase: my right hon. Friend talks about supply chains. He knows that my Select Committee—the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee—produced a report on this. Let us just blacklist companies that are based in Xinjiang. We cannot go in and check what is happening, and we know that it is basically a prison camp. Secondly, because I agree word for word with my right hon. Friend’s statement, I assume that he is going to be in the Lobby with me tonight backing the genocide amendment, because without it, the Neill amendment excludes the Uyghurs.
Minister reply
I thank my hon. Friend who continues to campaign with her usual eloquence and tenacity and I pay tribute to her on the issue of the Uyghur Muslims. We will look very carefully at the BEIS Committee report, not least because of the action that we are taking on supply chains under the MSA.
Alison Thewliss
SNP
Glasgow Central
Question
Amnesty International’s report ‘Hearts and Lives Broken: The Nightmare of Uyghur Families Separated by Repression’ tells a very chilling story of families who have no idea where their children are. What is the Secretary of State doing to make sure that the Uyghurs and all Chinese ethnic minorities who have been separated are facilitated to get back to their children and to put those families back together?
Minister reply
All I can say to the hon. Lady is what we have set out before the House which is that we are taking action under the Modern Slavery Act and that we are using the Magnitsky sanctions.
Janet Daby
Lab
Lewisham East
Question
Two weeks ago today, we celebrated International Women’s Day. Many of us spoke about the abhorrent persecution of Uyghur women but this community is clearly experiencing genocide by the Chinese Government. I am appalled to hear that the Secretary of State told his staff candidly that he planned to trade with any country regardless of their human rights record. If that is true, it is shameful. When will he call out the genocide of the Uyghur people and when will the UK take a world-leading role on this matter?
Minister reply
The remarks that the hon. Lady quoted are simply wrong. Today we are demonstrating the world-leading approach that we are taking to hold to account those responsible for human rights abuses in Xinjiang.
Anthony Mangnall
Con
Tindle
Question
It is extraordinary to hear the Opposition criticise the Government for not working with the international community one week and then criticise us this week for working with the international community. Today, we are taking a lockstep approach with 30 other countries. If the Opposition will not ask the salient questions then we will. May I ask how the Foreign Secretary will look to include or expand the list of those named in China and how we will be able to further engage the international community to take action where human rights violations take place?
Minister reply
I thank my hon. Friend for his powerful statement and his welcome support. Obviously, we do not comment on individual names, not least because we do not want to give them foresight or advance warning if we were to take measures.
Chris Bryant
Lab
Rhondda
Question
I warmly commend what the Foreign Secretary has announced today, not least because I have been calling for it, like many others across the House, for weeks and weeks. It is a delight to hear what he has had to say today, but I wish he would be a little bit less of a lawyer about all this. Sometimes it ends up looking as if the Government are trying to have it both ways all the time. Yes, announce sanctions against those involved in what I would certainly call genocide in China, but at the same time they drag their feet about it, take too long to deal with the human rights abuses in Hong Kong being perpetuated by Carrie Lam, and quite often refuse to take action against the dirty money, for instance, from Russia that is coming into the UK. May I urge him to think seriously about how we make the Magnitsky sanctions regime have more of a parliamentary angle so that we can help review and bring these sanctions into place?
Minister reply
I thank the hon. Gentleman and pay tribute to him, because back in 2012 he was one of the cross-party alliance in favour of these measures.
Fiona Bruce
Con
Congleton
Question
I warmly welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement. States where the fundamental human right of freedom of religion or belief is respected are more likely to be stable and therefore to be more reliable trading partners, and less likely to pose a security risk. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that it makes good sense for the UK to promote FoRB across the world, apart from this being the right thing to do?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. I pay tribute to her for her eloquent and tenacious role as a champion for freedom of religion and belief, and as the Prime Minister’s special envoy.
Wendy Chamberlain
Lib Dem
North East Fife
Question
It is good to see action finally being taken with regard to the atrocities being perpetrated in Xinjiang. I urge the Foreign Secretary to take further steps regarding the situation in Hong Kong. Last week, it was reported that Lord Neuberger will remain on the Hong Kong court of final appeal for another three years. Does the Secretary of State accept that such decisions risk legitimising China’s failure to abide by its international commitments and will he agree that it is no longer appropriate for UK judges to sit in Hong Kong courts?
Minister reply
I thank the hon. Lady for raising a really important point. I have had discussions about this not just with the Lord Chancellor but with the President of the Supreme Court.
Philip Hollobone
Constitutional Conservative
Kettering
Question
I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement and the action being taken, and congratulate him on the personal role that he has played in building the international coalition to highlight the atrocities against the Uyghurs. What in his opinion would be the ideal response from the Chinese regime to the actions today, and what response does he fear we will actually get?
Minister reply
That is a great question. Of course, we live in hope; I always want the door to be open on this and other issues where we want to engage. What I would like to see is either for China to moderate its action, or—if it contests that this is all fake news and nonsense—for it to allow Michelle Bachelet, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, to go in and verify the facts. That would seem, under all international auspices, a fair and reasonable way to determine the accuracy of all the allegations that have been made.
Carmarthen East and Dinefwr
Question
In their 2019 report on human rights and democracy, the British Government rightly label the death penalty “abhorrent”. Will the Foreign Secretary confirm that the British Government will not attempt to secure new trade deals with countries where the death penalty is operational in order to give global Britain a moral underpinning?
Minister reply
We already have free trade deals—indeed, the EU did such free trade deals—with countries around the world, from Asia to Africa, which have the death penalty or corporal punishment. I am curious to know whether the hon. Gentleman is actually advocating that we tear up those existing deals. I do not think that that would be the right thing to do. Of course, different countries have different approaches and different legal systems, but we are very clear that we would never do trade deals with countries whose records are beyond the pale. Notwithstanding whatever trade or investment we have, as we have demonstrated today, we will impose Magnitsky sanctions to hold to account those individually responsible for whatever abuses they may be involved with.
Shadow Comment
Lisa Nandy
Shadow Comment
The Foreign Secretary's statement is welcome but late. For years he has not listened to warnings from his own hon. Friends, the Board of Deputies, or the World Uyghur Congress despite mounting evidence. The timing is grubby and cynical; designed first and foremost to send a signal to his Back Benchers and protect the Government. On the day sanctions are announced on officials responsible for human rights abuses in Xinjiang, the Foreign Secretary is also pulling every trick in the book to stop Parliament gaining the power to block any bilateral trade or investment agreement with China based on a determination of genocide. If this signals a change in approach, why has it taken so long? Why did he say at a private gathering earlier this month that there was no reason to think we could not deepen our trading relationship with China? Why did the Prime Minister say last month that he was committed to strengthening ties with China 'whatever the occasional political difficulties'? Today I urge all parliamentarians to stand firm: to stand with the public, their consciences, and most of all with the Uyghur people.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.