UK-China Relations

Edward Morello Excerpts

Wednesday 26th March 2025 Westminster Hall

[Tony Vaughan]

It is difficult to see how we are going to address these huge global challenges without involving China. I am not advocating for China, but relevant to the hon. Member’s question is the fact that it has a hugely fast-growing green energy technology sector. Of course China has huge carbon omissions as well, and that is another issue.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

To answer the question from the hon. Member for Farnham and Bordon, 35% of China’s energy is renewable energy, which is up from 0% 15 years ago. By the end of this decade, given the rate at which it is expanding, China will be responsible for 60% of the globe’s renewable energy production.

[Tony Vaughan]

I am grateful for the hon. Member’s intervention; he is more on top of the statistics than I am.

With China being a member of the G20 and the UN Security Council, and the third-largest trading partner for the UK—if one includes Hong Kong—it is entirely logical that the Government should aspire to a more stable and consistent relationship. To do anything different would not be in the UK’s national interests.

--- Later in debate ---

[Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Con)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Farnham and Bordon (Gregory Stafford) for securing this important debate. UK-China relations will be increasingly important as we progress, and as the threat of China becomes more evident. I thank all hon. Members for their contributions. It seems there is a consensus about the threat that China poses, although it is not entirely unanimous; the hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan) seems to have a slightly different approach. I believe that China is one of the greatest threats—if not the greatest threat—to our freedom and security, which is why it is vital to address this issue.

China is a nation with a proud history and a rich civilisation, deserving of respect—but that respect cannot come at the expense of turning a blind eye to aggression, human rights abuses and attempts to undermine the international order. The Government have announced that they are conducting a China audit, but we are yet to hear what that actually entails. It is not enough for Ministers to review our policy towards China behind closed doors; the British people deserve transparency and Parliament deserves answers.

[Edward Morello]

Will the hon. Member give way?

[Andrew Rosindell]

I will make some progress, then come to the hon. Member if there is time.

I begin with the issue of Taiwan-Republic of China. Beijing’s increasingly assertive behaviour towards Taiwan—including military activity around the island, airspace incursions and naval operations—is a cause of growing concern. I ask the Minister: does the UK remain committed to the One China policy? If so, how do the Government intend to balance that position with our strong interest in supporting Taiwan’s democracy and the principle that the future of Taiwan should be determined peacefully and without coercion? The people of Taiwan should have the freedom to shape their own future without the threat of force. What steps are the Government taking, alongside the United States, Japan and Australia, to reduce tensions and deter any escalation in the Taiwan strait? Taiwan is a proud democracy and deserves to have its freedom. It should not be coerced—and, as an ally of Taiwan, we should certainly be standing shoulder to shoulder with it.

Next, I would like to say a few words about the belt and road initiative. Beijing claims that that programme is about infrastructure and development, but in reality it serves as a tool for strategic dominance and debt entrapment across Africa, Asia, and even parts of Europe. We have seen the consequences of that so-called investment: developing nations find themselves shackled by unsustainable debt, forced to hand over key infrastructure and strategic assets when they cannot meet Beijing’s demands. What is the Government’s strategy to counter that growing influence? How are we supporting our Commonwealth partners and other vulnerable nations to resist that economic model, and will the Minister tell us what alternative we are offering to the developing world, to avoid those nations being trapped in Beijing’s orbit?

Turning to Hong Kong, the Chinese Communist party’s flagrant violation of the Sino-British joint declaration is seriously jeopardising the “one nation, two systems” framework. Beijing has crushed political opposition, tried to silence the free press, and criminalised dissent. In light of that, I ask the Minister what our long-term strategy is for holding Beijing accountable for breaking its treaty obligations. How are we supporting British nationals overseas who have made the courageous decision to leave Hong Kong and settle in the United Kingdom, and who may be at risk of transitional repression?

The case of Jimmy Lai stands as a stark symbol of Beijing’s assault on press freedom and political dissent in Hong Kong. Lai, a British citizen and a founder of Apple Daily, has been targeted under Hong Kong’s draconian national security law for the so-called crime of defending democracy. His prosecution is not just an attack on an individual, but an attempt to silence independent journalism and intimidate anyone who dares to criticise the CCP’s actions in Hong Kong. What steps are the Government taking to protect the rights of British citizens such as Jimmy Lai who are facing politically motivated prosecutions in Hong Kong? Does the Minister agree that this politically motivated trial must end and that Jimmy Lai must be released, and what is the Government’s strategy for making the case that the national security law should be replaced?

The CCP’s human rights abuses in Xinjiang are well documented, with forced labour, mass internment, and systematic persecution of the Uyghur population. It is therefore deeply concerning that the Government appear to be resisting efforts to block the procurement of Chinese solar panels linked to forced labour through the Great British Energy Bill. I ask the Government directly: what assurances can Ministers provide that the UK’s transition to net zero will not come at the cost of complicity in modern slavery? How will the Government ensure that supply chains for renewable energy infrastructure are free from forced labour and other human rights abuses?

As the Leader of the Opposition rightly pointed out in her recent speech, the idea of achieving net zero by 2050 while relying heavily on Chinese technology and supply chains is “fantasy politics”. We cannot afford an over-reliance on China, as should have become clear following the pandemic. What steps are the Government taking to reduce strategic dependence on China, particularly in critical industries such as energy, telecommunications and rare earth minerals?

The proposed Chinese super-embassy in London raises concerns about Beijing’s growing influence in the UK. The unprecedented size and scope of that facility has prompted worries about potential security risks and pressure on Chinese dissidents. Reports of covert Chinese police stations in the UK add to those fears. Have the Government assessed the national security risks involved, and will they consider restricting or scaling down that proposal? More broadly, what steps are the Government taking to prevent foreign powers from using British soil for covert operations or political intimidation? I want to make the case again—as my party has said before—that China should be on the enhanced tier of the foreign influence registration scheme.

Finally, I must raise the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s recent visit to China. What, if any, assurances did the Chancellor seek on human rights during her visit on Hong Kong, the Uyghurs or Taiwan and how do the Government intend to ensure that any future economic engagement with China does not compromise our strategic interests? China presents one of the big geopolitical challenges of our age, not just to Britain, but to the entire free world; we cannot afford to be naive. Engagement must be grounded in realism, not wishful thinking. We must work with our allies to check aggression and defend our democratic values. The British people deserve to know where their Government stand, and the Government must be prepared to act and not just talk.

--- Later in debate ---

[Catherine West]

National security is paramount, and any engagement will be encased in that metal case of national security.

Turning to the Government’s China audit, as my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan) has said, under the last Government, our China policy was inconsistent, swinging back and forth—from David Cameron’s golden era to Liz Truss’s confrontational approach—as often as they changed Prime Minister. That is why a team in the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office has been conducting the China audit. It has consulted widely across Government and with a wide range of external stakeholders, including with some hon. Members in this room, who have been to see the Foreign Secretary to discuss their concerns. That is already proving valuable in developing policies and planning engagement.

[Edward Morello]

The China audit was due to be published earlier this year. I understand it is now slated for the summer. Will the Minister take this opportunity to confirm when it will be published? Will she also, moreover, confirm that the Foreign Secretary will appear before the Foreign Affairs Committee to answer questions about it?

[Catherine West]

I can certainly confirm that the audit will be made public before the end of the spring. Dates in the diary with the Foreign Affairs Committee are a matter for the Chair of that Committee, and anyone who dares to go against that Chair will be a very frightened individual indeed! I am sure that at any invitation, the Foreign Secretary will appear before the Committee, to speak on any topic. The House will have seen the marked difference between this Government, who are working hard to protect and pursue our interests, and the previous Government, who failed to stand up for British interests by having the difficult conversations with China that are so necessary.

I turn to national security. Any Government’s first duty is to keep the country safe, and we remain fully committed to that mission. We have taken strong action through the National Security Act 2023, which gives us robust powers to protect our industries and institutions. The UK is clear that attempts by foreign Governments to coerce, intimidate, harass or harm their critics overseas, undermining democracy and the rule of law, are utterly unacceptable. That is why we invited some of the British national overseas passport holders who have personally been put at risk by those sorts of disgraceful actions. That is why our defending democracy taskforce is driving a robust and co-ordinated response across Government and law enforcement.

My hon. Friend the Member for Altrincham and Sale West (Mr Rand), who is a doughty campaigner for British national overseas passport holders, made a very important point. The Government are taking a reasonable and proportionate approach to creating secure and resilient growth for the UK. With careful handling, national security and growth can be mutually reinforcing. We will continue to bolster resilience to economic shocks and tackle economic-based threats to national security. I ask anybody who has personal experiences and is concerned about any BNO passport holder in their constituency to write to me or to the Minister for Security, my hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley North (Dan Jarvis), immediately.

Growth and economic security, of course, are crucial and we cannot ignore China, given that it is the world’s second-largest economy and our fourth-largest trading partner, worth over £110 billion per annum. That shows why the partnership is so crucial for UK and global growth. However, as my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald) said, it is so important that that growth must be secure and resilient. He was quite right to point out a number of threats to that growth—including questions about public procurement, intellectual property and tech—and how it dovetails with our domestic industrial strategy. As he is aware through the role that he has here in Parliament, the domestic industrial strategy will be developed in concert with the China audit. I welcome his experience in understanding the depth of complexity around materials, in particular, and I look forward to hearing more about his expertise in that area.

On climate, in particular, and net zero, it is also essential that we engage China on global challenges. As the world’s largest investor in sustainable energy, the largest emitter of greenhouse gases and the largest producer of coal, the choices that China makes are critical to global efforts to tackle climate change, not just in China but across the world.

On human rights, the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) raised issues on which we need to challenge China. He is aware that it is our duty, as the Government, to hold China to account on its human rights record, including its repression of people in Xinjiang and Tibet. I refer him to the item 4 statement at the Human Rights Council in Geneva, fresh off the press, which reflects his concerns about freedom of religion or belief, which he has raised in this House on a number of occasions.

I turn to the UK’s long and historic relationship with Hong Kong. Forgive me if I run out of time, Ms Lewell. I hardly need to tell the House how deep and strong our people-to-people and trade links with Hong Kong are. That is why the Government will continue to stand with the people of Hong Kong. Since the launch of the British national overseas visa route, we have granted more than 219,000 applications, and we will continue to welcome and protect all Hongkongers who have made the UK their home in recent years. The Government recognise the ongoing erosion of rights and freedoms that are threatening Hong Kong’s way of life.

I briefly turn to Taiwan, which the Opposition spokesman raised. The UK—

Nutrition for Growth Summit

Edward Morello Excerpts

Tuesday 25th March 2025 Westminster Hall

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I congratulate the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) on securing this important debate.

Malnutrition is one of the greatest barriers to health, economic growth and development worldwide. It contributes to nearly half of all child deaths and has long-term consequences for education, economic productivity and global stability. The Nutrition for Growth summit presents a crucial opportunity for world leaders to address these issues and commit to sustainable solutions. The World Bank estimates that annual investment in targeted nutrition interventions must increase from £6.3 billion to £19.3 billion by 2034 to meet global needs.

The UK has long played a leading role in tackling these issues through targeted aid and development programmes, but recent reductions in the official development assistance budget threaten our ability to continue making a meaningful impact. The UK spent nearly £1 billion on bilateral aid for basic nutrition between 2009 and 2023. However, spending has declined sharply in recent years, from £146 million in 2017 to just £24 million in 2023. Similarly, broader nutrition-sensitive aid has fallen from a peak of £2.7 billion in 2016 to £1.2 billion in 2023. These reductions have been steeper than the overall decrease in UK aid spending. Since the shift to 0.5% of gross national income for aid in 2021, total UK aid fell by 21%, while nutrition-specific aid dropped by 61% and nutrition-sensitive aid dropped by 54%. The decision to reduce the UK’s ODA commitment to 0.3% of GNI by 2027 will only decrease our ability to meet this challenge.

Malnutrition does not just affect health outcomes. The UK has been a leader in development because we recognise that investing in nutrition delivers long-term benefits. Every £1 spent on nutrition intervention generates up to £16 in economic returns through increased productivity and reduced healthcare costs. Cuts to UK aid will leave a vacuum that countries such as Russia and China will fill. The Foreign Secretary has previously acknowledged the strategic risk of stepping back from development aid, and the Liberal Democrats have consistently warned that reducing aid weakens our ability to counter malign influences and support fragile states. Rather than cutting aid, the Liberal Democrats call on the Government to reverse the Tory tax cuts for big banks and tax the social media giants that are currently profiting from spreading misinformation and disinformation on behalf of our enemies.

The Nutrition for Growth summit in Paris is a moment to reaffirm the UK’s leadership in global development. We have always stood for a world where every individual has an opportunity to thrive. Liberal values are rooted in the belief that every person has worth, dignity and the right to a healthy life. The Government must ensure that the UK remains at the forefront of the fight against malnutrition, rather than retreating from it.

Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office

Edward Morello Excerpts

Wednesday 5th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office plays a vital role in supporting and protecting people around the world, upholding Britain’s diplomatic presence and promoting our values and interests. In my short time on the Foreign Affairs Committee, I have been repeatedly struck by the impressive quality of the people we are fortunate enough to have working on our behalf around the world. However, even as we face increasing geopolitical instability, transactional diplomacy and wars in multiple regions, the financial pressure on the Department is testing our ability to play the role that Britain should be playing in the world. For over a decade, the maintenance of the FCDO overseas estate, which includes 6,000 properties across 180 countries, has been funded through the sale of assets. That is not a sustainable model, and the reality is that there is no more silverware left to sell.

Giving evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee, Sir Philip Barton, the then outgoing permanent under-secretary, acknowledged that the current funding structure will not work for much longer. The cost of essential maintenance is estimated to be £250 million a year, and that figure is only rising. From next year, the ability to draw down from receipts of previous asset sales will disappear completely. Unless the Treasury allows for that additional cost in future budgets, the cost will have to be met by cuts elsewhere in an already overstretched Department.

This issue goes beyond bricks and mortar. The UK’s overseas presence is a direct reflection of our diplomatic standing and soft power. We cannot expect our embassies to champion British interests when they are in dire need of investment. The Foreign Secretary himself has recognised the need for a sustainable funding settlement and highlighted the condition of our estate in China as a particular concern. The Government must set out an alternative long-term funding model—one that does not rely on the fire sale of national assets.

At the same time, we must address the deeply concerning cuts to ODA. The UK has long been a world leader in international aid, and we are the fourth highest donor in absolute terms. The Government’s decision to reduce our aid budget risks undermining our ability to deliver on those commitments and the ones we have made to the world’s most vulnerable. The Prime Minister has rightly stated that the UK will prioritise Ukraine, Sudan, Gaza, climate finance and global health, but with a shrinking budget, delivering on those priorities will be close to impossible.

I recognise that difficult choices must be made to stand firmly with our allies in Ukraine during this critical time. Our support for the Ukrainian people must be strong and unwavering. It is a sad indictment of the current state of global affairs that in a war between the west and Russia, the first to withdraw from the fight was the United States. It is therefore even more vital that we increase defence spending to ensure that our allies around the world know that they can continue to rely on Britain in this increasingly unstable world.

The answer, however, is not to cut ODA. The Foreign Secretary himself warned of the risks of stepping back from development aid. The reality is that budget cuts will severely limit our ability to counter malign influence and to support fragile states. My party has warned that the UK’s decision to reduce its aid spending will

“leave a vacuum for Russia and China to fill”.

[James Naish]

It is worth reflecting on the fact that UK service personnel are obviously key to the defence of our country, and those cuts started during the time when the Liberal Democrats were in government. The hon. Member talked about his party regretting the actions of this Government. Does he regret the decision to start cutting our service personnel from 2010 onwards?

[Edward Morello]

I am not going to waste time re-arguing the coalition years—we have a global crisis happening. Either we all work together on this, or we keep nit-picking over the past. That is not the way to go forward.

I urge the Government to look at Liberal Democrat proposals to fund the much-needed uplift in defence spending not by cutting vital overseas development aid, but by reversing the tax cuts for banks introduced by the previous Government and by taxing the social media companies that, even now, are profiting from spreading disinformation on behalf of our enemies. We must work together to secure a sustainable funding model for the FCDO—one that protects our overseas estate and ensures that our diplomats have the resources they need to represent Britain effectively.

Finding a pathway to a just peace in Ukraine, a workable solution for the Palestinian and Israeli people, security for Europe and a united global approach to tackling the climate crisis, as well as the many other issues facing the world right now, in the face of a US Administration seemingly intent on joining malign states like Russia and Iran in rejecting international norms, requires the UK to be centre stage in international relations. Having a Foreign Office able to project British influence has never been more important. I urge the Government to set out a clear path on how we will maintain our diplomatic and development commitments in this increasingly uncertain world, and to ensure that Britain does not become just “some random country” but continues to play its historic role in global affairs.

Carbon Monoxide Poisoning: Travel Advice

Edward Morello Excerpts

Tuesday 11th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) for securing this vital debate, and for the powerful and deeply moving speech he made.

The story of Hudson Foley, a young man with his whole life ahead of him, tragically lost due to carbon monoxide poisoning while travelling, is one that should never have to be told. Yet, tragically, Hudson’s story is not an isolated case. There have been too many lives lost, too many families shattered, and the Government response is sadly inadequate. As we have discussed, carbon monoxide is an invisible killer: odourless, colourless and impossible to detect without proper equipment. It is produced when fuels such as gas, oil, paraffin, charcoal or wood do not burn properly, which makes it a hidden danger in many settings. Homes, hotels and holiday rentals are all susceptible.

Without adequate warning, education and safety measures, travellers are left vulnerable to risks they do not even know exist. As we have heard, the statistics are sobering. There were 28,900 deaths worldwide in 2021 alone. This issue does not affect only one country or demographic; it is a global problem and demands urgent action. The heartbreaking reality is that those deaths are preventable. My hon. Friend rightly made the point that portable carbon monoxide alarms can dramatically reduce the risk, yet far too few travellers are aware of their importance.

The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office has a clear and pressing duty to act to protect not just British travellers, but their loved ones. It is failing to provide strong, explicit warnings about the dangers of carbon monoxide poisoning in its travel advice, and that must be addressed. British travellers trust FCDO guidance; it is widely used by individuals, families and the travel industry itself, and yet nowhere does it mention the very real risk of carbon monoxide poisoning. That must change.

The Liberal Democrats call on the Government to take the following steps immediately: update country-specific travel advice to include warnings about carbon monoxide poisoning risks; amend the guidance and foreign travel checklist pages to provide clear advice on CO safety; actively encourage travellers to carry portable carbon monoxide alarms and launch a public information campaign to ensure that travellers are aware of the risks and how to protect themselves. Those are incredibly simple, easily achievable measures that would save lives.

The loss of life that we have heard about today is not due to chance. It is a result of a failure to prioritise public health and safety. Under the last Conservative Government, the public health grant was cut by 26%, undermining crucial initiatives that could have helped prevent those tragedies. Let us be clear: every death from carbon monoxide poisoning is one too many. We have the tools to stop them happening and the Government should act. The case of Hudson Foley highlights how devastating inaction can be.

I must praise the dedication of Hudson’s family. It was only because of their persistence that his cause of death was confirmed—something that would have otherwise gone unnoticed, as many countries do not require a post-mortem toxicology report for suspected CO poisoning. I hope the Government will recognise that an appropriate tribute to his life and to the hard work of his family would be to adopt our proposals and prevent future deaths from happening.

We should not just stop at protecting travellers. We also need urgent action to ensure that people are safe in their own homes. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) highlighted cases in Northern Ireland. The recent tragedy in Swanage, Dorset, where three elderly people lost their lives, likely due to CO poisoning, has exposed serious gaps in our domestic regulations. Unlike in Scotland, care homes in England are exempt from CO alarm regulations—an appalling oversight. Vulnerable residents deserve protection, and the Liberal Democrats call on the Government to close that loophole immediately.

The issue also highlights broader failures in public health policy. The Liberal Democrats have long campaigned for an increase in the public health grant, ensuring that funding is allocated to address the worst health inequalities, including those linked to CO exposure. We should also push for greater awareness in travel literature, as outlined by my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey Heath, and urge travel agencies and tour operators to include carbon monoxide safety advice as standard practice.

Finally, I want to pay tribute to Cathy Foley, Hudson’s mother, and the incredible work she has done through Hudson’s Pack Safe appeal. Her campaign, in partnership with the Safer Tourism Foundation, has documented cases of carbon monoxide poisoning deaths across a wide range of accommodations worldwide, from major hotel chains to short-term rentals such as Airbnb. Cathy’s advocacy, alongside the cross-party support of the all-party parliamentary carbon monoxide group, demonstrates how much change is needed. I am deeply grateful to Cathy and her family for their work and for being here today to share their story—one that no parent should ever have to tell.

I do not think this should be a political issue. The Lancet has described carbon monoxide poisoning as an almost entirely preventable cause of death. There can be no justification for continued inaction. We owe it to Hudson and to his family, and to all those who have lost loved ones to this silent killer. By making simple, practical changes, we can save lives. I ask the Government to seize the opportunity to do so.

British Indian Ocean Territory: Sovereignty

Edward Morello Excerpts

Wednesday 18th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Doughty]

No, I have not, and I certainly have not heard them from the Opposition Benches.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

I will repeat the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller), which the Minister studiously avoided. Clearly, the deal was not ready to be signed, so why was it announced two weeks before the election?

[Stephen Doughty]

When we are looking to protect the national security of this country, we will operate at the fastest and most appropriate pace that we can. This matter had been left languishing under the previous Administration, with the future of the base unsecure. We have secured it.

Oral Answers to Questions

Edward Morello Excerpts

Tuesday 26th November 2024 Commons Chamber

[Anneliese Dodds]

We are deeply concerned about the destabilising impact of the Iranian regime within the region and beyond. The right hon. Lady mentioned a number of cases where we can see that impact clearly. I would also underline that the truly devastating humanitarian crisis in Yemen is very much connected to Iranian backing of the Houthis. We have repeatedly raised our concerns about this bilaterally and multilaterally. We are clear that we need a strong voice as a UK Government on these matters, and that is exactly what we are delivering.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

8. What recent steps his Department has taken to deliver the ECHO 2 programme.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Catherine West)]

The ECHO 2 telephone contract for telephones in the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office is 79% completed, but is on track for completion in January 2025. Ministers and officials have been working day and night to fix the procurement mistakes of the previous Government.

[Edward Morello]

The ECHO 2 programme is crucial to delivering the new global communications network for the FCDO. The Minister mentioned that it is due for completion in January 2025, but will it remain within budget? What are the plans to ensure that it delivers its full technical and financial benefits? Does the Minister think that any additional support or adjustments will be needed to ensure its delivery?

[Catherine West]

With increased scrutiny and hard-working Ministers and officials, we will reach all targets. I will write to the hon. Gentleman with more details on his specific question.