(5 days, 21 hours ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, is it not time the Government considered developing a UK-based alternative to X? We have an excellent engineering talent pool, an AI research start-up ecosystem and high demand for an alternative to X. This would generate jobs and economic growth. What steps have the Government taken to make an alternative to X a reality?
My Lords, I was dared to see whether we could get in “Ruth social” as opposed to Truth Social for any new platforms, and my noble friend has given me that opportunity. There are numerous existing platforms with huge reach, and it is about how we use them in the UK and how we make sure they are effective for the British people. WeAre8 is a social interest company that is trying to change the face of the internet; there are many other providers, and we must look at them in the round to make sure that we are using the right ones in the right place.
(1 month ago)
Lords ChamberI thank the noble Baroness for her work as a member of the committee. I make it clear that we keep all legislation and its effectiveness under review, and we will continue to do so under the new National Security Act 2023. I would like to reassure your Lordships’ House that one of the things we have already done was a change in the mechanism of government: the Security Minister now has joint responsibilities to the Home Office and the Cabinet Office, ensuring a level of co-ordination on some matters.
On her second point about timings, my understanding is that it did not take eight months on the government side. I will talk noble Lords briefly through the timeline: counterterrorism police first approached the Cabinet Office for discussions on the second witness statement on 25 November 2024, and the Cabinet Office then submitted the second witness statement on 21 February 2025. In the months between, the Deputy National Security Adviser was clarifying the request and working with a small number of officials from the National Security Secretariat, but our appreciation is that it was not eight months.
My Lords, labelling something an official secret is all too convenient a way for the Government to keep people in the dark. One example is BCCI, a bank that was forcibly closed in July 1991 but there has never been a full independent investigation. After five and a half years of legal battle, I obtained one document called the Sandstorm report. It shows that the Government were funding al-Qaeda and protecting arms smugglers, murderers and others. Will the Minister now ensure that the document is made publicly available and at least put in the Library of this House so that we can hold the Government to account? What is so secret about it? I have put it on the internet and everybody can see it. Why can the Government not release it?
My Lords, I usually practise for left-field questions but I was not ready for that one. I thank my noble friend for his question and I will reflect on what he says, but let us be clear: the clear responsibility of this Government, as for any Government, is national security, and we will never undermine that.
(2 months, 4 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberThe noble Lord asks a series of questions—at Question Time there is typically just one—which I suggest that we discuss when we have the Statement repeat from the other end, because my honourable friend the Security Minister will be on his feet on this very issue within the next two hours.
My Lords, if China is considered to be a security threat, will the Government end ownership of UK infrastructure by entities connected with the Chinese Government? That kind of infiltration formed part of the previous Government’s privatisation policies.
My noble friend raises an interesting point, which has been discussed many times in your Lordships’ House, about the role of Chinese investment in our country. The reality is that we consider both that there is an element of security threat but also that we have the potential to compete, challenge and co-operate with China. China is the second-largest economy and our third-largest trading partner; we have to have a level of engagement.