Baroness Northover
Main Page: Baroness Northover (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Baroness Northover's debates with the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
(4 years, 6 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Northover
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of their relationship with the government of China; whether they intend to alter that relationship; and if so, how they intend to do so.
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Department for International Development (Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon) (Con)
My Lords, our approach to China is rooted in our values and strategic interests. As a leading member of the international community and as a major economy, China has to be involved in solving global issues. However, when engaging China, we stand up for our principles, including international law, human rights and national security. We want a mature, pragmatic relationship with the Chinese Government, which means collaborating where our interests align, being clear where they do not, and working to resolve our differences.
Baroness Northover (LD) [V]
Given China’s economic and political dominance, its threats to Hong Kong and Taiwan, and in the South China Sea, and its eternal suppression of human rights, do the Government still think that there can be a golden age of engagement with China? Given that we cannot do this alone, with which countries are the Government working to achieve this?
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
My Lords, as the noble Baroness knows, I am an eternal optimist: there can of course be a new golden age, in every sense. We are working with China on the important issue of Covid-19; indeed, China has helped not just us but others with PPE procurement. Other areas where there is scope for collaboration include issues around trade and the environment, a cause close to the noble Baroness’s heart. We are working collaboratively on COP 26, because, without China’s participation, COP 26 will not achieve its ambitions. We work constructively in all these areas. As I said earlier, where we have differences, we raise them—privately, at times, but in international fora at other times.