(1 day, 22 hours ago)
Commons ChamberUrgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I listened carefully to the points that the hon. Gentleman made, but there were a number of them. Let me reflect on them, and then I shall be happy to discuss them with him further.
Having seen violence in my constituency last night, I want to say clearly that violence is never the answer, that it is wrong, and that those engaged in it should face the full force of the law. Despite what Sinn Féin tells us, there is always an alternative to violence. We do not want attacks on people—including the police—on homes or on businesses. We do not want families to feel unsafe. We do not want little children from different ethnic backgrounds to feel afraid or fearful even to go to school.
However, the many people who are angry and scared because of uncontrolled immigration, and because of the barbaric act just two nights ago and the footage of the incident that has been displayed, want to see politics and democracy fill the space. There is significant concern in Northern Ireland about open borders. Will the Minister release the numbers on those who have crossed into the United Kingdom via the border with the Republic of Ireland, and will he commit himself to at least starting to replicate the Republic of Ireland’s system of checking people who travel from the United Kingdom—from Northern Ireland—to the Republic of Ireland? People need to see this Government take action.
I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her condemnation of the violence. The Government absolutely understand the concerns and are working to address the underlying issues that underpin those concerns. It is important to make the point that, on top of increased deportations and removals, we are seeking to remove the pull factors that bring people here in the first place. Illegal work arrests are up by 60%, hotel use is down by 63% since its peak, and asylum claims are down by 12%. Much has been done, and there is much more to do, but we absolutely understand the concerns.
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberI have described the actions that we will take, but it is also important to recognise the work that the police do, often in difficult and challenging circumstances. There has been an impressive response from the Met over the past few days; we need to ensure that it has the support to continue that. If the hon. Member has any particular issues with regard to his local synagogue or local community, I would be happy to meet him to discuss them.
The Government recently introduced specific legislation to protect the Islamic community, ignoring the very real and greater threat to Jews in the UK. When will we see specific legislation to protect Jews, and indeed Christian preachers, across the United Kingdom?
I am sorry to say that the hon. Lady’s characterisation is not fair. I have been incredibly clear about the work and the support that we are providing to Jewish communities. We take that incredibly seriously. Where there is a requirement to do more, and to do things differently, we will not hesitate to do so. Where we need to introduce new legislation, we will not hesitate to do so. The Government will ensure that all communities are kept safe.
(3 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberThe Minister has said numerous times that the Government always prioritise UK national security, but those words ring hollow whenever we think of the Chinese embassy, and the fact that this Government have granted a mega-embassy close to underground cables carrying highly sensitive data. In the light of these highly concerning developments, surely the Government should show courage, strength and leadership, and with immediate effect revoke that decision in the interest of national security.
With great respect to the hon. Lady—I always listen carefully to what she has to say, because she represents a part of the United Kingdom that I have a long-standing interest in—she is not right in what she says about the embassy. I refer her to comments made by the Intelligence and Security Committee and the director generals of our security services. The arrangement that underpins the Chinese embassy involves the reduction of the diplomatic estate in London from seven sites down to one. I hope that when she looks at it in those terms, she will understand that there are national security advantages from that proposal.
(4 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberThe 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. Ultimately, nothing—nothing—will prevent this Government from ensuring our national security. That is why we have progressed this proposal incredibly carefully and made sure we have the right mitigations in place.
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? How do Government justify a decision that is both shameful and reckless in its disregard for national security?
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. We do. There are those who think—and it is an entirely reasonable position if people want to take it—that the situation could get worse with the agreement of this embassy. As I have tried to explain, because of the mitigations we have put in place and the consolidation of the diplomatic estate, there are clear national security advantages as a consequence of this proposal. She does not perhaps agree now, but I hope she understands that the Government take these matters incredibly seriously and will do everything they can to safeguard our national security.
(1 year, 1 month ago)
Commons ChamberUrgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I agree with the sentiment expressed by the right hon. Gentleman. On the issue of the money, that is something the Secretary of State will be looking closely at.
In Northern Ireland, the term “kneecap” is related to a violent criminal act. When a grouping take that as their name, express a desire for MPs to be murdered and support proscribed organisations like Hezbollah and Hamas, we have to question why they have been awarded so much UK taxpayers’ money. Yesterday, I took the opportunity to write to the US and Canadian authorities asking them to refuse any visa applications from these hatemongers ahead of their publicised tour of North America to prevent them from spreading their violent message across the world. Will the Minister join me in lobbying for that?
As the hon. Member may be aware, I am—not to the same extent as herself—intimately familiar with the connotations of the name from my previous professional experience, so I completely understand why she has made the point in the way that she has. Let me undertake to go away and think more specifically about the points she has raised, but I am happy to discuss them further with her or with any of her colleagues should she wish to do so.