China Audit
Debate between Jim Allister and David Lammy(2 weeks, 4 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Lammy
I recognise the sensitivity and the import of what the hon. Lady says. That is central to the considerations and discussions that are under way within Government as we look at these issues and balance them against our national security.
Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)
For weeks, some questions on China have been deflected on the basis that we should wait for the audit, so it is rather disappointing that the insight we get today is very opaque. In the Foreign Secretary’s statement, he reveals that China is the UK’s second largest research collaborator. Has he done an audit of the nature of that research? Are there economic and intelligence risks from that research, and are the Government minded to take any steps either to monitor or to control the extent of that research?
Mr Lammy
The hon. and learned Gentleman says that he would have liked to hear more and the statement was opaque, but the other side of that coin is that it might be reassuring that the Government are not making all of our intelligence capability and understanding available to China and the outside world. He will recognise that the biggest academic partner in that research is the United States, and given the way the economy of China has grown, certainly over my two decades in Parliament, it is not surprising that it has emerged as our second largest. I want to reassure him that, of course, the agencies are able to offer full advice to universities and examine sensitivities, and we are very aware of the threats he has conveyed to the House.
Middle East
Debate between Jim Allister and David Lammy(2 weeks, 5 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Lammy
I can state again, as I have stated throughout the afternoon, that diplomacy is the way, and I remind the hon. Gentleman that our Government, and successive Governments, have learned from the Chilcot inquiry.
Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)
Why should the House of Commons, and those in the country that we represent, not be entitled to know whether their Government support or regret the American action? Does not equivocation on that issue bring succour to those who we say must be robbed, quite properly, of their nuclear potential?
Mr Lammy
I think that the people of Britain are entitled to know that we were not involved in this action, and that we work for diplomacy and de-escalation. That is why I was sitting in the White House last week, it is why I was in Geneva on Friday, and it is why I was at a Cobra meeting and making a round of calls to allies and partners to de-escalate at this time yesterday.
Ukraine
Debate between Jim Allister and David Lammy(4 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Lammy
I know my hon. Friend’s constituency well, and I am very pleased to give his constituents that affirmation.
Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)
No Member of this House should be in any doubt as to who the aggressor is in this situation, who the dictator is, or who started this war. No one should give cover to the dictator who started this war. The Prime Minister has said that, if there is peace, he anticipates a post-peace situation where there will be British troops on the ground in Ukraine, with what he termed “a US backstop”. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that the prospect of a US backstop would be greatly enhanced if the European nations began more thoroughly to shoulder the financial burden that has been shirked in recent years?
Mr Lammy
Yes, I do. There was complacency in the post-cold war period across the European families, and at this Dispatch Box we have lamented the fact that the United Kingdom has fallen to 2.3% of GDP, so the hon. and learned Gentleman is right. This is the time to step up and to demonstrate peace with strength, and the Baltic nations are very clear about the responsibility at this time.
Syria
Debate between Jim Allister and David Lammy(7 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Lammy
My hon. Friend rightly says that that territory is illegally occupied. I confirm from the Dispatch Box that, as has been the case under successive Governments, the UK assessment is that it is occupied land.
Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)
May I bring the Foreign Secretary back to a point raised by the shadow Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for Witham (Priti Patel), which I do not think he fully addressed? Will he assure the House that the Government will block any asylum applications from Assad’s acolytes in the years ahead?
Mr Lammy
I have seen it mentioned in the past few days that Asma al-Assad, as someone with UK citizenship, might attempt to come to our country. I confirm that she is a sanctioned individual and is not welcome here in the UK. Having appointed Margaret Hodge to her role this morning, and having introduced in the past five months more sanctions than ever before in that space of time, I assure the House that I will do everything in my power to ensure that no one from that family finds a place in the UK.
British Indian Ocean Territory: Negotiations
Debate between Jim Allister and David Lammy(9 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Lammy
Let me just say to the hon. Gentleman, because there is seriousness behind his question, that all of us believe in the right to self-determination. I am unequivocally, absolutely clear that the overseas territories remain an important part of our national story and nothing we have done in this deal puts them in any jeopardy.
Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)
Given the exploitative response of Argentina in the context of the Falklands, is it not clear that those with malevolent aspirations about British territory are drawing comfort from the belief created by this deal that this Government are weak on the question of sovereignty? Does that not come off the back of the fact that Westminster, within the United Kingdom, surrendered sovereignty in over 300 areas of law in Northern Ireland to a foreign Parliament—namely, the European Parliament? If the Foreign Secretary wants to demonstrate that his assurances to Gibraltar and the Falklands are to be taken seriously, then should he not begin by reclaiming sovereignty over all of the United Kingdom and reverse the surrender of sovereignty in over 300 areas of law in Northern Ireland?
Mr Lammy
We will always defend the Falkland Islands. I raised that point with Argentina’s Foreign Secretary just last week in New York.