This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2020/jan/28/labour-says-government-claim-to-be-reversing-beeching-rail-cuts-meaningless-live-news

The article has changed 15 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 10 Version 11
Johnson's Huawei decision 'major defeat' for US, says former Republican Speaker Newt Gingrich - live news Johnson's Huawei decision 'major defeat' for US, says former Republican Speaker Newt Gingrich - live news
(32 minutes later)
Rolling coverage of the day’s political developments as they happenRolling coverage of the day’s political developments as they happen
Julian Lewis, a Tory former chair of the defence committee, says Huawei is not independent of the Chinese state.
Raab says the relationship between Huawei and the Chinese state has been central to the analysis of the threat it poses.
Dominic Raab is responding to John Nicolson.
He says an outright ban, of the kind proposed by the SNP, would not remove the firm from the British telecoms network, it would not encourage diversification of supply, and it would increase costs for business.
The SNP’s John Nicolson says the government has opted for the “cheapest, least secure option”.
He says using Huawei is not safe. Under Chinese law, firms have to cooperate with the state, she says.
He says, with 5G, the peripheral network communicates with the core. He says malware can be hard to detect. He says countries like Australia have chosen block Huawei. That may turn out to be the right choice, he says. He says the UK government has taken the wrong choice.
Theresa May, the former PM, says she commends the government for this decision.
When she was PM, she was reportedly planning to come to the same decision on Huawei and 5G.
She says it is essential that five eyes partners work with the UK to ensure that there is more market diversification, so that in future governments are less reliant on Huawei.
Raab commends May for the work on this issue that took place when she was PM.
Raab is responding to Thomas-Symonds.
He says intelligence sharing will not be put at risk, and never will be. High risk vendors have never been involved in intelligence networks, and never will be, he says.
And Andrew Parker, head of MI5, has said that he does not think intelligence sharing with the US will be at risk from this decision.
Thomas-Symonds says a rush by the government to throw itself into the arms of President Trump to get a trade deal must not govern everything it does.
He says the UK has had to choose between just three 5G vendors. What can be done to ensure more are available, he asks.
He says 5G will be transformational. It will shape the economy of the future, he says. But the government first said the UK would be a global leader in this in 2017, he says.
He asks Raab to explain how there won’t be a risk to communication channels used for intelligence.
He asks for an explanation of the difference between core and periphery in 5G. (See 2.58pm for an answer.)
And he asks when the new regulations will be brought to the Commons.
Nick Thomas-Symonds, a shadow Home Office minister, is responding for Labour. He says there has been too much “dither and delay”. This decision should have been made earlier, he says.
Raab says there will be nothing in the plans that will stop the government sharing highly-classified intelligence, either within the UK or with five eyes intelligence partners (ie, the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand).
Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, is making a Commons statement about the Huawei/5G decision.
He says the government will do nothing to undermine UK security, or the security of its allies.
He says the UK has conducted the best analysis of what needs to be done to keep 5G secure. And he says it has a better understanding of the threat posed by Huawei than any other country, he says, because it has been monitoring Huawei already for years.
Summarising the review published by the National Cyber Security Centre (see 12.32pm and 2.58pm), he says the planning to introduce what will be among the stronger regulations for 5G in the world.
He says the government will legislate to limit the role of Huawei in 5G. And it will take steps to ensure that there is more diversity in the market, so that the government in future is not so dependent on Huawei.
He sums up some of the factors that will be taken into account when deciding if a 5G suppliers is high risk.
Here is a question from BTL (below the line).
I’m afraid I don’t have the technical knowledge to answer that, but Ian Levy, technical director at the National Cyber Security Centre, does understand this stuff and he was written a blog today explaining the risk that “high-risk vendors” like Huawei pose to the 5G network, and what can be done to mitigate the risk. It is intended as a simplified version of the report published today by the NCSC. (See 12.32pm.)
In the blog Levy specifically covers the claim that there is no distinction between core and non-core in 5G. He says:
This is from Sean Spicer, who was press secretary to President Trump during Trump’s first six months in office.This is from Sean Spicer, who was press secretary to President Trump during Trump’s first six months in office.
Tracy Brabin, the shadow culture secretary, has issued this statement on the Huawei decision on behalf of the Labour party.Tracy Brabin, the shadow culture secretary, has issued this statement on the Huawei decision on behalf of the Labour party.
The statement does not say what a Labour government would have done faced with the same dilemma. Instead it makes a version of the time-honoured opposition argument: “We wouldn’t have started from here.”The statement does not say what a Labour government would have done faced with the same dilemma. Instead it makes a version of the time-honoured opposition argument: “We wouldn’t have started from here.”
From CNN’s national security correspondent Kylie AtwoodFrom CNN’s national security correspondent Kylie Atwood
Here is some more US reaction to the Huawei decision. This is from Elise Stefanik, a Republican congresswoman from New York.
Industry leaders have said the salary threshold recommended in the report from the migration advisory committee - £25,600, not £30,000 as previously proposed - is still too high.
The Food and Drink Federation, whose members rely heavily on EU citizens to staff food production sites including meat processing factories, unattractive to many British workers, said this was “a step in the right direction” but urged the government to “consider going further still by adopting the ‘growing rate’ system outlined.
EU nationals currently make up a quarter of the 430,000-strong workforce in food and drink manufacturing and many businesses will be recruiting under immigration rules for the first time, said the FDF.
London First, which represents some of the capital’s biggest employers, said the MAC could have gone further and proposed a £20,000 threshold, which “would have ensured we could keep the economy at full strength”, it said.
The Federation of Small Businesses said: “FSB research shows that four-in-five small employers that hire staff into jobs classed as mid-skilled do so into roles with salaries less than £30,000. This includes positions in sectors such as engineering and IT.”
And Universities UK said it remained concerned about its post-Brexit ability to recruit lab technicians, language assistants and other researchers from the EU even with the proposed salary threshold. “We are also concerned that standard salary levels in higher education sectors would no longer be recognised, meaning it will be harder to attract international talent into key lecturer roles,” Alistair Jarvis, its chief executive, said.
Turning away from Huawei, negotiations on the UK’s post-Brexit relationship with the EU will start on 3 March, my colleague Daniel Boffey reports.
Here is an analysis of the Huawei decision from Dan Sabbagh, the Guardian defence and security correspondent.
Nick Timothy, who was co-chief of staff to Theresa May when she was prime minister until the 2017 general election, has criticised the Huawei decision.
From the BBC’s security correspondent Gordon Corera
According to a YouGov poll, members of the public are more likely to be against using Huawei to build the 5G infrastructure than in favour by a margin of three to one.
But almost half of the public do not have a view, the poll also suggests.
And this is from Steve Baker, the Tory backbencher, on the Huawei decision.
By “this seems to be happening”, he means he is commending the government for stressing what it is doing to mitigate the Huawei risk, he says.
Tom Tugendhat has now posted an eight-part thread on Twitter explaining some of his concerns about the Huawei decision.
And here is his conclusion.
Tom Tugendhat, the Conservative MP who chaired the foreign affairs committee in the last parliament, and Sir Iain Duncan Smith, the former Tory leader, were two of the backbenchers most critical of Huawei when MPs debated the issue in the Commons yesterday afternoon. Now the decision has been formally announced, they have restated their opposition to the plan.
These are from LBC’s Theo Usherwood and ITV’s Daniel Hewitt.