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 11 Version 12
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
Raab says there was a risk that banning Huawei could trigger trade retaliation. But that is not why this decision was taken, he says.
Bernard Jenkin, the Conservative, says he does not necessarily welcome the decision, but he understands it. He says the government should set up a review to see what lessons can be learnt.
Raab says this has been a failure of government, and of Western governments. He says the government has set out plans to ensure that it does not find itself in this position again.
President Trump has sent out his first tweets of the day. But he is not saying anything about Huawei (so far). Instead he is complaining about Fox News being biased against him ...
Crispin Blunt, another Tory former chair of the foreign affairs committee, says the intelligence and security committee should consider this issue. And he says the government should tell the Chinese they expect reciprocity.
Raab says that is an important point about the relationship with China.
Tom Tugendhat, the Tory MP who chaired the foreign affairs committee in the last parliament, asks if the 35% cap covers the new market, or the existing market.
Raab says the government papers explain how the 35% cap works. It is roughly equivalent to existing market share, he says.
Labour’s Barry Sheerman says there are businesses who think their intellectual property is being stolen by the Chinese every time they put it on the internet.
Bob Seely, a Conservative, asks for an assurance that MPs will be able to debate on what constitutes a high-risk vendor. And he says non trusted vendors should be built out of the system.
Raab says there is already a definition of a high-risk vendor.
Liam Fox, the former Tory international trade secretary, asks if the concern in Washington is about the UK’s ability to mitigate the risks of Huawei, or about the UK sending a message to other countries about Huawei being acceptable.
Raab says the UK and the US start from a different place. He says the government asked Washington if it could propose an alternative. He says the Americans did not have an answer on that point.
This is from Jon Sopel, the BBC’s North America editor, on the Tom Cotton quote. See 3.29pm.
Labour’s Pat McFadden asks if at any point the US has linked this decision to the chances of the UK getting a trade deal.
Raab says the Americans have not done this to his knowledge.
Iain Duncan Smith, the former Conservative leader, says he is “deeply disappointed” by this decision. He says defending in cyber networks is always a matter of catch-up. He says Huawei will always be in the periphery. Does Raab accept that China is a threat? And will the government try to drive Huawei out of the network for good?
Raab says it is important to assess the nature of the risk. The government is doing that.
He says an outright ban would be a “very blunt tool” to deal with a very specific problem.
Penny Mordaunt, the Conservative former defence secretary, says this decision is “regrettable”.
David Davis, the Tory former Brexit secretary, says Huawei should have been banned from the 5G network.
This is from the Telegraph’s Ben Riley-Smith. He is quoting Tom Cotton, a Republican senator from Arkansas.
Julian Lewis, a Tory former chair of the defence committee, says Huawei is not independent of the Chinese state.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.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.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.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”.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 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. 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 to 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.
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.”
From CNN’s national security correspondent Kylie Atwood