Text of the comments made by Matt Warman, the Minister for Digital Infrastructure, on 22 July 2020.
We’re investing billions so no part of the UK is left behind by the opportunities and economic benefits that faster, more reliable and more secure digital connectivity brings.
These changes will help target public funding in hard to reach areas most in need of better broadband. It will also help mobile companies banish rural not-spots by upgrading and sharing their masts.
The text of the formal apology made by the Labour Party to John Ware on 22 July 2020.
The Labour Party has today issued an unreserved apology to John Ware, who investigated and presented the July 2019 BBC Panorama programme about antisemitism within the Labour Party.
Before the broadcast of the programme the Labour Party issued a press release that contained defamatory and false allegations about John Ware. We would like to take this opportunity to withdraw these allegations. We would like to apologise unreservedly for the distress, embarrassment and hurt caused by their publication.
As we acknowledge in the Statement in Open Court, John Ware is a very experienced broadcast and print journalist, producer and author, and we have agreed to pay damages to him.
Under the leadership of Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner, we are committed to tackling antisemitism within the Labour Party. Antisemitism has been a stain on the Labour Party in recent years. It has caused unacceptable and unimaginable levels of grief and distress for many in the Jewish community, as well as members of staff.
If we are to restore the trust of the Jewish community, we must demonstrate a change of leadership. That means being open, transparent and respecting the right of whistleblowers and the free press and freedom of expression which includes the right to object to things written or published. We are determined to deliver that change.
Text of the letter sent from Anneliese Dodds, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, to Rishi Sunak, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 22 July 2020.
Dear Chancellor,
The Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) that you announced today takes place in extraordinary circumstances. The outlook for our economy, and our public finances, looks completely different today to how it looked even six months ago.
The CSR needs to reflect that. This is a moment to think boldly and strategically about the kind of country we want to be, and the public services we need, as we emerge from this crisis and prepare ourselves for the future. In particular, we need to ensure that a health emergency which has done so much to restrict economic activity is not compounded by political choices around public spending that weaken demand further. We must learn the lessons of the last crisis.
As things stand, however, it is not clear whether the instructions you have given to departments are more in line with the Prime Minister’s promise that “we are absolutely not going back to the austerity of ten years ago” or the intimations in your statement today that further – and potentially significant – cuts are on the way.
The messages are similarly mixed when it comes to paying the public workers who have done so much for us all throughout the crisis. Last night you announced that some would be receiving a pay rise and yet this morning you spoke of “restraint” and the prospect of cuts to come. That is not the right way to treat those who have contributed so significantly to tackling the coronavirus, often at great personal risk.
The CSR – and the context in which it is taking place – raises big public policy questions. They deserve to be discussed openly and publicly so that voters know whether this is genuinely an exercise in designing public services fit for the 21st century or if it just presages a return to an ideological approach to spending that gave us the slowest economic recovery in eight generations.
As such, I am calling on you today to publish the directions you have given to government departments so that everyone can see the context in which those departments will begin making critical choices about their spending plans and operations.
I look forward to hearing from you and engaging with this process, which comes at such a critical time for our country.
Yours sincerely,
Anneliese Dodds
Text of the comments made by Anneliese Dodds, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 22 July 2020.
This has been the toughest of times for Britain’s workers, wherever they work. Even before Covid-19 hit, real terms wages were flatlining for many and even falling for others compared with a decade ago.
Yesterday there seemed to be light at the end of the tunnel for some frontline workers. But the language in the Chancellor’s announcement on the Comprehensive Spending Review suggests he might be giving with one hand only to take away with the other.
This is not the time to fall back on policies that delivered the slowest economic recovery in eight generations. And it’s not the time for the government to keep the public in the dark about its fiscal plans.
It’s time for the Chancellor to come clean and explain how he plans to delivers growth across the country and rebuild the vital public services we all rely on.
The text of the comments made by Lisa Nandy, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, in the House of Commons on 20 July 2020.
I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement and for advance sight of it. May I be clear that the Opposition strongly welcome both of the measures he has announced today? He is right to ensure that Britain does not allow our exports to be used against the people of Hong Kong, and I thank him warmly for taking this step forwards.
I am particularly glad that the Government have listened to my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry), the shadow Secretary of State for International Trade, and suspended the export of surveillance equipment alongside the suspension of the export of crowd control equipment, which was demanded of the Government by the Labour Opposition last year. Will the Foreign Secretary go further and also review the training of the Hong Kong police by the College of Policing and other UK police forces to ensure that we are playing a part in helping to uphold, and not suppress, the rights of the people of Hong Kong?
May I also welcome the indefinite suspension of the extradition treaty and the safeguards that the Foreign Secretary announced today? It affords protection to the Hong Kong diaspora community here in the UK, and particularly to the brave young pro-democracy activists, whom I recently had the pleasure to meet.
We believe it is vital that the world shows a co-ordinated front on this issue. I was heartened to hear that the Foreign Secretary had discussions with our Five Eyes partners. Canada, Australia and the USA have already taken this step. Will he speak to other key allies, including Germany, to ensure that there is a co-ordinated international response? He also made no mention of our Commonwealth partners. Has he reached out to those Commonwealth countries that have extradition treaties with Hong Kong, to ensure that BNO passport holders and pro-democracy activists can travel freely without fear of arrest and extradition?
The Foreign Secretary could take a number of other steps. He made a commitment today that the UK will not accept investment that compromises our national security. Will he confirm that that will extend to the proposed nuclear power project at Bradwell, and will he tell us what assessment the Government have made of the security implications of Sizewell C?
Elections are due to take place in Hong Kong in the autumn, and we are concerned that, just as in the case of Joshua Wong, the Chinese Government may seek to bar candidates from standing. A clear statement from the Foreign Secretary today that candidates selected through the primary process are legitimate and must be allowed to stand in those elections would send the message that, as he says, the world is watching. I also ask him to work internationally to ensure that independent election observers are allowed into Hong Kong to oversee those elections.
The Foreign Secretary was a little irritated by my suggestion yesterday that the UK ought to impose Magnitsky sanctions on Chinese officials involved in persecuting the Uyghur people and undermining basic freedoms in Hong Kong, but I gently say to him that we have known that Uyghurs have been detained in camps since at least 2017. Has any work at all been done on that by the Foreign Office? Given that the USA has already imposed similar sanctions, is he working with our US counterparts to build the case for UK sanctions, and will he discuss this with the US Secretary of State tomorrow when he meets him?
The Foreign Secretary may not have done the groundwork to enable him to impose Magnitsky sanctions now, but his Government have the power right now to take action. He could, as the US has done, bar Communist party of China officials from the UK. Why has he not done that? The Chinese ambassador said yesterday that he reserves the right to take action against British companies. What discussions has the Foreign Secretary had with British companies operating in China to offer advice and assistance? I have asked him a number of times whether he has had discussions with HSBC and Standard Chartered about their stated support for the national security law. He must condemn that support. We should be showing the best of British business to the world, not the worst.
I was pleased to hear that the Foreign Secretary had discussions with Australia and New Zealand about their making a similar offer to BNO passport holders, but we are concerned, after asking a range of parliamentary questions, that there are serious holes in this offer. We have been told by the Government that BNO passport holders and their families will not receive home status for tuition fees, will not have access to most benefits and will have to pay the NHS surcharge. That seems wrong.
We are welcoming BNO passport holders to the UK for similar reasons to refugees, but these measures are completely out of step with that. Without serious action before these proposals are published, we will essentially be offering safe harbour only to the rich and highly skilled. That may benefit the UK, but it lacks the generosity and moral clarity that this situation demands. The Foreign Secretary will also know that many young pro-democracy activists are too young to be eligible for BNO passports. The Home Secretary said last week that she was considering a specific scheme for 18 to 23-year-olds. Will those details be published before the summer, and can he provide more detail today?
Finally, this must mark the start of a more strategic approach to China based on an ethical approach to foreign policy and an end to the naivety of the golden era years. If it does, the Foreign Secretary can be assured that he will have the Opposition’s full support. Like him, our quarrel is not with the people of China, but the erosion of freedoms in Hong Kong, the actions of the Chinese Government in the South China sea and the appalling treatment of the Uyghur people are reasons to act now. We will not be able to say in future years that we did not know. I urge him to work with colleagues across government to ensure that this marks the start of a strategic approach to China and the start of a new era.
The text of the statement made by Dominic Raab, the Foreign Secretary, in the House of Commons on 20 July 2020.
With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement updating the House on the latest developments with respect to China, and in particular Hong Kong.
As I told the House on 1 July, the UK wants a positive relationship with China. China has undergone an extraordinary transformation in recent decades, grounded in one of the world’s ancient cultures. Not only is China the world’s second largest economy, but it has a huge base in tech and science. The UK Government recognise China’s remarkable success in raising millions of its own people out of poverty. China is also the world’s biggest investor in renewable technology, and it will be an essential global partner when it comes to tackling global climate change. The Chinese people travel, study and work all over the world, making an extraordinary contribution.
Let me be clear: we want to work with China. There is enormous scope for positive, constructive engagement. There are wide-ranging opportunities, from increasing trade to co-operation in tackling climate change, particularly with a view to the COP26 summit next year, which the UK will be hosting. However, as we strive for that positive relationship, we are also clear-sighted about the challenges that lie ahead. We will always protect our vital interests, including sensitive infrastructure, and we will not accept any investment that compromises our domestic or national security. We will be clear where we disagree, and I have been clear about our grave concerns regarding the gross human rights abuses being perpetrated against the Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang.
It is precisely because we recognise China’s role in the world as a fellow member of the G20, and fellow permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, that we expect China to live up to the international obligations and responsibilities that come with that stature. That is the positive, constructive, mature and reciprocal relationship that we seek with China, striving for good co-operation, but being honest and clear where we have to disagree. We have been clear about the new national security law that China has imposed on the people of Hong Kong. That is a clear and serious violation of the UK-China joint declaration, and with it a violation of China’s freely assumed international obligations.
On 1 July, I announced that we are developing a bespoke immigration route for British nationals overseas and their dependants, giving them a path to citizenship of the UK. The Home Secretary will set out further details of the plans for a new bespoke immigration route for BNOs and their dependants before the recess. That bespoke route will be ready by early 2021, and in the meantime the Home Secretary has already given Border Force officers the ability to grant leave to BNOs and their accompanying dependants at the UK border.
Beyond our offer to BNOs, today we are taking two further measures, which are a necessary and proportionate response to the new national security legislation that we have now had the opportunity to assess carefully. First, given the role that China has now assumed for the internal security of Hong Kong, and the authority that it is exerting over law enforcement, the UK will extend to Hong Kong the arms embargo that we have applied to mainland China since 1989. To be clear, the extension of the embargo will mean there will be no exports from the UK to Hong Kong of potentially lethal weapons, their components or ammunition, and it will also meet a ban on the export of any equipment not already banned that might be used for internal repression, such as shackles, intercept equipment, firearms and smoke grenades.
The second measure relates to the fact that the imposition of this new national security legislation has significantly changed key assumptions underpinning our extradition treaty arrangements with Hong Kong. I have to say that I am particularly concerned by articles 55 to 59 of the law, which give mainland Chinese authorities the ability to assume jurisdiction over certain cases and to try those cases in mainland Chinese courts. The national security law does not provide legal or judicial safeguards in such cases, and I am also concerned about the potential reach of the extraterritorial provisions.
I have consulted the Home Secretary, the Justice Secretary and the Attorney General, and the Government have decided to suspend the extradition treaty immediately and indefinitely. I should also tell the House that we will not consider reactivating those arrangements unless and until there are clear and robust safeguards that can prevent extradition from the UK being misused under the new national security legislation.
There remains considerable uncertainty about the way in which the new national security law will be enforced. I just say this: the United Kingdom is watching and the whole world is watching. In the past few weeks, I have been engaged with many of our international partners in a concerted dialogue about how we should best respond to the unfolding events we are seeing in Hong Kong. On 8 July, I spoke with our Five Eyes Foreign Minister partners. We agreed on the seriousness of China’s actions and the importance of pressing Beijing to meet its international obligations. I welcome the fact that Australia, Canada and the US have taken a range of measures with respect to Hong Kong including, variously, export controls and extradition, as we have done today.
I also discussed the situation with our European partners, including Josep Borrell, the EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs. The UK Government also welcome the EU announcement on 13 July, which sets out further proposed measures in response to the national security legislation.
A number of our international partners are also considering what offers they may be willing to make to the people of Hong Kong following the UK’s offer in relation to BNOs. I can reassure the House that we will continue to take a leading role in engaging and in co-ordinating our actions with our international partners, as befits our historic commitment to the people of Hong Kong.
As I said at the outset, we want a positive relationship with China. There is a huge amount to be gained for both countries. There are many areas where we can work productively and constructively to mutual benefit together. For our part, the UK will work hard and in good faith towards that goal, but we will protect our vital interests. We will stand up for our values, and we will hold China to its international obligations. The specific measures I have announced today are a reasonable and proportionate response to China’s failure to live up to those international obligations with respect to Hong Kong, and I commend this statement to the House.
Text of comments made by Priti Patel, the Home Secretary, on 21 July 2020.
I am driving change to implement the important findings of the Lessons Learned review to make sure nothing like this can happen again.
The action I have taken will ensure cultural change at the department, leading to more diverse leadership.
I want the Windrush generation to have no doubt that I will reform the culture of the department so it better represents all of the communities we serve.
The text of the comments made by Jonathan Ashworth, the Shadow Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, on 20 July 2020.
It is scandalous that the nation’s most senior nurse was silenced at the height of the pandemic because she wasn’t prepared to parrot Downing Street spin about Dominic Cummings’ blatant rule breaking.
As the Chief Nursing Officer indicates, it’s unacceptable that’s there was one rule for Johnson’s elite friends and another for the rest of us.
What’s more, it’s astonishing that the Health Secretary refused to explain in the Commons today why he allowed for the chief nurse to be dropped in this way.
The text of the comments made by Jo Stevens, the Shadow Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Secretary, on 21 July 2020.
The pandemic has reinforced just how dangerous misinformation can be – with serious consequences for people’s health. But despite consecutive Conservative governments knowing about the problem of misinformation for years, this report lays bare that once again the Government has been slow to act.
It has been more than 15 months since the promised online harms legislation and the select committee shares our concerns that this long overdue legislation puts safeguarding profits of the big tech platforms before public safety.
The text of the comments made by Anneliese Dodds, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 21 July 2020.
The Conservatives froze public sector pay for seven long years, and the rises they introduced after that failed to plug the gap.
A pay rise for our police, nurses and teachers now is good news, but for many frontline workers it still won’t make up for a decade of real terms pay cuts.
And many other public sector workers – including those working on the front line in social care – won’t get a pay rise out of this at all because the Tories haven’t made good on their promises to boost local authority funding.
That’s not fair – and it’s no way to reward those who’ve been at the forefront of fighting this pandemic.