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/mar/10/cabinet-secretary-mark-sedwill-to-be-questioned-by-mps-about-work-of-government-and-priti-patel-live-news
The article has changed 18 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 8 | Version 9 |
|---|---|
| Johnson facing Commons revolt after 26 Tories back amendment for Huawei to be excluded from 5G - live news | Johnson facing Commons revolt after 26 Tories back amendment for Huawei to be excluded from 5G - live news |
| (32 minutes later) | |
| Rolling coverage of the day’s political developments as they happen | Rolling coverage of the day’s political developments as they happen |
| Duncan Smith says the government has said that it wants to work towards having no high-risk vendors (ie, no Huawei) in 5G. | |
| He accepts that this bill might not be the best vehicle for an anti-Huawei amendment. | |
| But he says he wants three things. | |
| First, he wants an assurance that the government will move towards eliminating Huawei from the network. That means working with allies. | |
| He says that pledge must be made clearly, with a timescale. | |
| And he says the government must commit to bringing forward a bill later this year, by May, setting out the government’s intentions. | |
| He says he will only decide whether or not to pull his amendment when he has heard what the minister is saying. | |
| And he says the government must “commence the beginnings of that retraction before the end of this parliament”. He repeats the point about willing to be flexible on his precise deadline. (See 1.59am.) | |
| Duncan Smith offers to call off revolt if government promises to include long-term plan to exclude Huawei in legislation. | |
| In the light of the commitments already made by Oliver Dowden, the culture secretary, in his letter to MPs (see 1.34pm), it sounds more likely than not that Duncan Smith will pull his amendment later. | |
| Duncan Smith says the UK is alone in its assessment on this matter. He says its security partners take a different view of the threat posed by Huawei. | |
| Damian Green, the Tory former first secretary of state, says if the UK allows Huawei to build its 5G, other countries will do the same. So the effect of this decision will be to allow the Chinese to infiltrate telecoms in many countries, he says. | |
| Duncan Smith says that is a powerful argument. China will capture telecoms in these countries, he says. | |
| Duncan Smith says there is a danger that the UK would become even more dependent on Huawei. One estimate is that after three years the UK would be fully dependent on it for 5G. | |
| He says this would be a threat to national security. | |
| He says there are three other firms that could supply 5G infrastructure to the UK: Nokia, Ericsson and Samsung. | |
| He says people say these providers would cost more. But in a debate between cost and security, security should win every time, he says. | |
| Sir Iain Duncan Smith, the former Conservative leader and former work and pensions secretary, is speaking now. He has tabled the rebel amendment backed by 26 Tories. (See 12.18pm and 1.30pm.) | |
| He says it is wrong to describe Huawei as a private company. It is owned by Chinese trade unions, and controlled by the Chinese government. | |
| And he says it is wrong to describe this as a market failure problem. He says it is just that other companies have not been able to compete with Huawei because it has been subsidised by the Chinese government. | |
| The Tory MP Tobias Ellwood, chair of the defence committee, intervenes. He says Duncan Smith’s amendment may not be put to a vote today because of the latest assurances from the government. (See 1.34pm.) But he says they will have put down a marker. He says there are five possible global vendors. But two of them are not allowed to operate outside Japan and South Korea. If they were, the UK would not need to use Huawei, he says. | |
| Duncan Smith accepts this point. He says there used to be 12 firms in this market. He says he does not think Huawei technology is superior. It is just that they are cheaper, because they are so heavily subsidised. | |
| The Tory MP Alec Shelbrooke asks if Duncan Smith would be willing to change the deadline he has set (December 2022) for the removal of Huawei. | |
| Duncan Smith says he is “flexible” on the date. But what matters is the government’s commitment to getting rid of Huawei, he says. | |
| This is from the Spectator’s James Forsyth on today’s debate. | This is from the Spectator’s James Forsyth on today’s debate. |
| Onwurah says Labour’s amendment differs from Sir Iain Duncan Smith’s (see 1.30pm) in two respects. | Onwurah says Labour’s amendment differs from Sir Iain Duncan Smith’s (see 1.30pm) in two respects. |
| She says Labour’s would ban Huawei (or equipment from a “high-risk vendor”, to use the government’s terminology) immediately, while Duncan Smith’s would only bring in a ban from 2023. | She says Labour’s would ban Huawei (or equipment from a “high-risk vendor”, to use the government’s terminology) immediately, while Duncan Smith’s would only bring in a ban from 2023. |
| And she says Labour’s amendment would only apply to “newly deployed” telecommunications infrastructure, while Duncan Smith’s would apply to all telecommunications infrastructure, she says. | And she says Labour’s amendment would only apply to “newly deployed” telecommunications infrastructure, while Duncan Smith’s would apply to all telecommunications infrastructure, she says. |
| These are from ITV’s Paul Brand. | These are from ITV’s Paul Brand. |
| Onwurah says Labour is not opposed to the bill as a whole. | Onwurah says Labour is not opposed to the bill as a whole. |
| But Labour is siding with the Tory rebels. Jeremy Corbyn has tabled an amendment to the bill that is very similar to Iain Duncan Smith’s. | But Labour is siding with the Tory rebels. Jeremy Corbyn has tabled an amendment to the bill that is very similar to Iain Duncan Smith’s. |
| The Corbyn amendment says: | The Corbyn amendment says: |
| And the Duncan Smith amendment says: | And the Duncan Smith amendment says: |
| MPs have just started the report stage debate on the telecommunications infrastructure (leasehold property) bill. | MPs have just started the report stage debate on the telecommunications infrastructure (leasehold property) bill. |
| The bill has a very limited purpose. It is about giving telecoms firms the right to enter blocks of flats to install broadband when the tenants want it, but the landlord is failing to respond to requests for engineers to have access. | The bill has a very limited purpose. It is about giving telecoms firms the right to enter blocks of flats to install broadband when the tenants want it, but the landlord is failing to respond to requests for engineers to have access. |
| But Tory MPs want to use the debate, and a vote on Sir Iain Duncan-Smith’s amendment (see 12.18pm), to make a point about Huawei. The Duncan Smith amendment would not ban Huawei from the entire 5G network after 2022, only from networks being installed in leased premises under the terms of the bill, but later this year the government is planning to put forward legislation covering 5G, and MPs voting against Huawei today are also likely to vote against Huawei’s general involvement in 5G when that bill gets debated. | But Tory MPs want to use the debate, and a vote on Sir Iain Duncan-Smith’s amendment (see 12.18pm), to make a point about Huawei. The Duncan Smith amendment would not ban Huawei from the entire 5G network after 2022, only from networks being installed in leased premises under the terms of the bill, but later this year the government is planning to put forward legislation covering 5G, and MPs voting against Huawei today are also likely to vote against Huawei’s general involvement in 5G when that bill gets debated. |
| Chi Onwurah, the shadow industrial strategy minister, is opening for Labour. She welcomes the fact that Oliver Dowden, the culture secretary, is on the government bench, ready to speak for the government. Cabinet ministers normally leave it up to junior ministers to speak in report stage debates like this one, and Onwurah speculates that Dowden might be here to announce a government U-turn. | Chi Onwurah, the shadow industrial strategy minister, is opening for Labour. She welcomes the fact that Oliver Dowden, the culture secretary, is on the government bench, ready to speak for the government. Cabinet ministers normally leave it up to junior ministers to speak in report stage debates like this one, and Onwurah speculates that Dowden might be here to announce a government U-turn. |
| As HuffPost’s Paul Waugh reports, towards the end of health questions Matt Hancock, the health secretary, said the government would extend sick pay coverage so that the lowest-paid and the self-employed can get sick pay if they need to take time off because of coronavirus. | As HuffPost’s Paul Waugh reports, towards the end of health questions Matt Hancock, the health secretary, said the government would extend sick pay coverage so that the lowest-paid and the self-employed can get sick pay if they need to take time off because of coronavirus. |
| Philip Hammond has warned that the country should be braced for a “significant dip” in the economy as it deals with coronavirus and urged the new chancellor to intervene to help small businesses. Ahead of the budget tomorrow, Hammond, who served as Theresa May’s chancellor, said the impact of the illness on the country would be “real” and he expected an economic slowdown. | |
| He suggested Rishi Sunak, who was promoted by Boris Johnson last month, should consider helping small firms with cashflow problems by postponing deadlines for VAT payments, national insurance and PAYE deductions. Hammond told the BBC’s Radio 4 Today programme: | |
| Boris Johnson is definitely facing a Commons revolt this afternoon, my colleague Dan Sabbagh reveals. He says it is understood that the Speaker, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, has selected the Huawei amendment to the telecommunications infrastructure (leasehold property) bill being debated this afternoon. | Boris Johnson is definitely facing a Commons revolt this afternoon, my colleague Dan Sabbagh reveals. He says it is understood that the Speaker, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, has selected the Huawei amendment to the telecommunications infrastructure (leasehold property) bill being debated this afternoon. |
| Twenty-six Conservative MPs have signed the amendment tabled by the former Tory leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Dan reports. | |
| Even though Labour is gearing up to support the rebels (see below), this would not be enough to defeat the government. Taking into account the non-attendance of Sinn Féin MPs, and the three deputy speakers who do not normally vote, Johnson has a working majority of 87. | |
| But if there is a vote (it is always possible Duncan Smith could pull his amendment in response to verbal assurances from the minister at the dispatch box), it will be the first proper revolt Johnson has faced on a Commons vote since the general election. | |
| There is an urgent question at 12.30pm, so the debate will probably start at around 1pm. | There is an urgent question at 12.30pm, so the debate will probably start at around 1pm. |
| In the Commons, Matt Hancock, the health secretary, has just told MPs that the government is considering reviewing the list of people allowed to provide medical services in the light of coronavirus. | |
| Last week Prof Chris Whitty, the government’s chief medical adviser, told a committee that greater use could be made of medical students. | Last week Prof Chris Whitty, the government’s chief medical adviser, told a committee that greater use could be made of medical students. |
| This is what the health minister Jo Churchill told MPs a moment ago: that she was planning to give GPs an exemption from some health bureaucracy to allow them to have more time to focus on coronavirus. She was responding to Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow health secretary, who asked if the government would suspend requirements for GPs to fill in forms relating to appraisals, and the quality and outcomes framework (QOF) during the crisis. Churchill replied: | |
| In response to a question from Ashworth about the distribution of personal protective equipment to GPs, she said two thirds of this had been rolled out already, and that the rest would be arriving imminently. | |
| In the Commons Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow health secretary, asks if government will lift the bureaucratic requirements on GPs so that they have more time to focus on coronavirus. | In the Commons Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow health secretary, asks if government will lift the bureaucratic requirements on GPs so that they have more time to focus on coronavirus. |
| Jo Churchill, the health minister who is replying, says that she is considering this. | Jo Churchill, the health minister who is replying, says that she is considering this. |
| The public administration and constitutional affairs committee hearing has not quite finished, but Sir Mark Sedwill has managed to get through it so far without setting off many ripples across the pond of news. | |
| In the Commons, Matt Hancock, the health secretary, has just started taking health questions. | |
| In response to a question about public health grants to councils, he said local authorities could plan with confidence on the basis that their budgets could be going up in real terms, and that a full announcement would be made shortly. | |
| Q: The government wants to repeal the Fixed-term Parliaments Act. But under the act, a committee is due to be set up this summer to review its operation. Will that still go ahead? | |
| Sedwill says in one sense the answer to this is the same as the answer on the democracy commission. (See 11.16am.) Options are being offered to ministers. The act could be repealed wholesale, or non-controversial parts of it could be retained, he says. | |
| Q: Is there a cut-off point when you have to decide whether or not to have the committee reviewing the act? | Q: Is there a cut-off point when you have to decide whether or not to have the committee reviewing the act? |
| Sedwill says he thinks that would have to be set up between June and November. He says it has not been decided yet what would happen. | Sedwill says he thinks that would have to be set up between June and November. He says it has not been decided yet what would happen. |
| Q: Do you think it is best just to revert to the royal prerogative if the act is repealed? | Q: Do you think it is best just to revert to the royal prerogative if the act is repealed? |
| Sedwill says it is possible. But the question of whether the royal prerogative (ie, the PM’s power to decide the date of a general election) would resume automatically if the FTPA was repealed, or whether if would have to be actively restored, has yet to be decided. | |
| He says elements of the FTPA were good. It gave clarity about the length of a parliament. But other aspects of it did not work well, as people discovered last year. | He says elements of the FTPA were good. It gave clarity about the length of a parliament. But other aspects of it did not work well, as people discovered last year. |